A clickbait "article" in today's Daily Telegraph (UK) with 19 WHS listed for consideration of receiving this "honour" - but still worth having a look at! It is presented with a degree of both ignorance and tongue in cheek - but a fair number of our "old favourites" are there. Rather a lot of Scandinavian ones - but NONE from UK!!! A few where it seems to miss the OUV - UNAM for instance.
Anyway - no doubt we each have our own candidates!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/lists/unusual-world-heritage-sites/

Almost all of these sites deal with industrial or commercial heritage, and are relatively modern (or at least not ancient).

Personally, industrial sites are some of my favorite sites.

I think many people have an idea that world heritage sites have to be ancient ruins or something.

I'm not a fan of industrial, commercial or modern heritage but I don't mind visiting some for a change. I wouldn't go as far as saying that they are worth the trip alone but some offer quite a learning experience. To each his own, I guess.

What happens to this list at photo 20? they just start putting up photos of UK cities.

Also I went on a weekend "lads trip" to Benidorm last year, just to get in a pre-emptive tick, I don't think it will be troubling ICOMOS too soon :)

From a few days earlier they have this clickbait article, as well, which does have some sites I'd find worthy of the list, and others that would have made it 15 years ago - but others, like Warwick Castle, which while beautiful is probably less interesting than the town's really unique Survival Gothic St. Mary's church and the Beauchamp chapel. I also found it a bit over the top, even compared to other great castles in the UK. It's really a contrast in how much one values aesthetic and iconic (and mostly medieval) sites over possibly more obscure and less-touristic places, but important markers of human development. I think there's room for both, one just needs to do sufficient research and have an open mind to enjoy less "epic" historical sites. It's no secret on this message board how fantastic the Plantin-Moretus House in Antwerp is and I bet many go into that rather skeptically.

The "Northern Ireland Game of Thrones sites" is hilarious - if we are delving into film and television sites, Game of Thrones ranks pretty low in historical importance, compared to the Spaghetti Western sites in Spain and the studios of Hollywood.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/destinations/europe/united-kingdom/galleries/uk-her itage-sites-scandalously-ignored/

I visited quite a few of these places and must say I really liked them. The visits are enjoyable and a nice contrast to all these cathedrals and castles I usually visit.

Seriously, that list is crap. You must have very little knowledge about architecture to put Fagus Factory on such a list.

I always find a site like this one and other online resources tend to give you a pretty good picture of what to expect. And I agree with Kintante: Going out of your way to these strange places is often more interesting than another Baroque church or absolutist palace.

The "scandalously ignored" list even bashes Fray Bentos again, just like the "most disappointing" list. Someone's got a grudge against industrial heritage.

Just for a little context, Fray Bentos has a bit of name notoriety in the UK as it is also a brand of cheap and cheerful pies in a can. So the focus on a somewhat obscure Uruguayian site has a little more resonance with your average person in the UK.

It is little like suddenly finding out there is a place in Pennsylvania called Heinz where they produce beans, or (stretching the idea a little) discovering the town of Kinder in Piedmont where birds lay chocolate eggs, and they have been inscribed as a WHS.

It would seem odd on two counts; one, that the places actually exists and two, has been recognised as being of Outstanding Universal Value.

What a stupid article indeed even though it is meant to be a clickbait. It is based on the general misconception that a WHS should be something 'sublime' like ancient temples, cathedrals or opera houses.

I'm particularly 'sorry' for our Swedish neighbours because they have four of their well maintained sites on this worthless list. At first when I read Solivagant's comment on Scandinavian WHS on the list I directly thought that there must be some sites from Finland (even though it is not really Scandinavian) but to my surprise there were any.

Daily Telegraph could highlight some breaking headlines also from Finnish WHS:
- Sammallahdenmäki: Piles of stones in a forest - Where is the boom in visitors?
- Kvarken Archipelago: A seashore soon without water - Would you really want to spend your holiday there?
- Verla: A factory where they used to make cardboard for educational posters - What a waste of time...
- Petäjävesi Old Church: Useless just as Berlusconi said "Some wooden church just about to fall down. In Italy we would have demolished it."

Hilarious

So he REALLY did say it!!! It was obviously more of a "cause celebre" in Finland than elsewhere!
For "non-Finns" see more here - http://prince.org/msg/105/307708?pr

Perhaps we should have a few reviews like these
http://metro.co.uk/2014/12/05/are-these-the-worlds-grumpiest-travellers-bad-reviews-o f-the-most-amazing-places-in-the-world-4974563/

Oh, I'm a bit surprised that someone non-Finn knows the case. Maybe I must take back this common joke (in Finland) because it is not completely true :)

Well, I think he really said that but what is the church or in which country it is, that is unclear.

The Finns would like to think it was Petäjävesi Old Church but it clearly was not. Either it was a wooden church in some other country, most likely in Iceland, or it was a wooden church in Seurasaari (an Open-Air Museum in Helsinki) which he visited in 1971.

So much talk about stupid man's stupid sayings...