I'm not sure if this topic has ever been raised.
But I find some inscriptions on the world heritage list lacking universal value. Also some things that I am seeing on the tentative list don't really seem worthy to be included to me.

I know politics is a factor, which is actually a shame. And it kinda deludes the list a bit.
But what I was wondering is:
If given the chance, which sites would you stricken from the list or which sites do you find "unworthy" to be on it?

One site I never really got (though I have yet to visit it) is schokland (Netherlands). It has an interesting story, but is it really that special?

Provins seems to be deferred quite a few times and then suddenly included.

never been quite a fan of architecture-listings either. Like the modern housing estates in berlin, but atleast I can get why they are included.

Routes of Santiago de Compostela in France, without a doubt. Probably more, will have to think about it.

May I ask why you would remove that one? :)

I'd remove one of the Chinese mountains, probably Mount Sanqingshan National Park
Provins and Le Havre are also on my list
Protective town of San Miguel and the Sanctuary of Jesús Nazareno de Atotonilco is a rather pointless one
I don't know if Liverpool deserves WHS status.

not really remove but subsume, that is merging several sites that represesent the same outstanding value into one serial nomination. just like the 1992 historic and scenic areas nomination of china, mt sanqingshan and huangshan, the santiago de compostela route in france and spain, etc.