Which map is this? I'm guessing whoever made it may have got a little confused and ahead of themselves.

The Historic Centre of Antwerp and the Palace of Justice in Brussels are both on the tentative list for Belgium, they may have got confused and melded the two together, whilst also misunderstanding the nomination process?

Either that or they are really big fans of Richard Rogers and have just awarded the building a place on the list unilaterally. It looks rather nice in pictures.

https://ibb.co/bzq2V8

From the mag "Take Antwerp", the museum is correctly labeled with the logo but the court is probably wishful thinking as you say.

The website for Museum Plantin-Moretus claims this is the only museum in the world listed as UNESCO? I mean, it is a printing house turned museum, and there are many sites around the world with a museum, or a place that turned into a museum, right?

I've read tat too and asked myself the same question. How about Museum insel in berlin than?

Perhaps they mean it is the only museum that was nominated on its own? Places like the Louvre are nominated as part of a larger area but of course one could argue that many castles like Versailles are museums too

I note that Fontainbleau's web site address calls it a "Museum" - http://www.musee-chateau-fontainebleau.fr/spip.php?lang=en

The Plantin Moretus claim as written is clearly specious - instead of claiming "Museum Plantin-Moretus is the only museum in the world on the UNESCO World Heritage list." it should say something more like "Museum Plantin-Moretus is the only building in the world on the UNESCO World Heritage list which was built for a purpose other than as a museum but is now called a museum in its title and is on the list as a single building..........." But that doesn't sound anywhere near as "impressive"!!

The UNESCO web site contains this piece of informtion about Museums on WH Sites -
"Around 8,000 museums are said to be located in either cities or sites classified as World Heritage"
https://whc.unesco.org/en/world-heritage-and-museums/

The same figure with a bit more background is cited in the book "Museums and World Heritage sites - A New Path to Shared History" (Wiley, 2015). This states -
"One of the most effective mediators of communication about and presentation of World Heritage Sites should be the heritage institutions located in and around these protected zones. Although no official source is available there are said to be about 8000 of these institutions including storage facilities, archaeological conservation centres, interpretation centres and visitor centres"

As if being on the WH List isn't enough in itself, some sites just love to claim even further "uniqueness". Bath used to claim to be "The only complete city inscribed on the World Heritage List" on the basis that its "boundaries coincided exactly with the boundaries of the (former!!) municipal city".
I wrote to them and pointed out a few other contenders and they "reduced" the claim to "Bath is one of only a handful of city-wide World Heritage Sites." !!!!

I think it is quite an achievement to have influenced the way the city of Bath presents itself, congratulations. I was quite amazed to see the core zone of Bath since the real area of OUV seems between the river bend and the Crescent with the possible extension of Priory Park. All of this would be about a tenth of the inscribed core zone! This may be due to the early inscription date when they were mornfenerous or more sloppy with the limits. Today most of the city would probably fall into the buffer zone.

I am often amazed though how many places have no concept of the meaning of core and buffer zones. The French town of Angers boasts that its historic center is Unesco WH as you can see f. e. On https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angers. it is clear on the UNESCO map of the Loire valley that this is wrong. I do not even know why it is not inscribed since it seems one of the most attractive towns in the valley

Sometimes I wonder that UNESCO doesn't care how correctly or falsely places use its name for PR

The forum topic of "Belgium" is perhaps not the best place to discuss this matter (we should perhaps open a new topic on "Buffer Zones"??) but Bath does not have ANY buffer zone - this is in common with a number of other UK sites - the Tower of London is another example. See this quote "Like other nominations at the time, the WHS does not have a buffer zone, although the landscape setting of the city is recognised as very important to its historic value" ( from http://www.aylinorbasli.com/Resources/Bath%20World%20Heritage.pdf ). Although that gives "early inscription" as the reason, the lack of Buffer zones has been a matter of long term argument between UK and UNESCO. For various reasons UK has dug its heels in on this matter and has managed to avoid pressure to institute Buffer Zones retrospectively as has been done in many other WHS, But the Operational Guidelines are clear in merely stating "Wherever necessary for the proper conservation of the property, an adequate buffer zone should be provided' The document titled "The City of Bath WH Site Setting" refers to this guideline and goes on to say "This recognises that there are various options for protecting the setting of WHSs. The planning system in England is well suited to protecting setting with or without a buffer zone" (See - https://www.bathworldheritage.org.uk/sites/world_heritage_site/files/heritage/World%2 0Heritage%20Site%20Setting%20Supplementary%20Planning%20Document.pdf )

Thanks a lot! This will be some interesting reading. I am quite impressed what you have in store for WH-related documents

As a heads up for anyone near Belgium this week, not only will the biannual Flower Carpet be on display in the Grand Place from 16-19 August, but there will also be eight floral carpets representing Monuments of UNESCO in nearby Bourse square from 17-19 August in honor of the 20th anniversary of the Grand Place becoming a World Heritage Site. More information here.

The Flower Carpet in the Grand Place in Brussels this year was spectacular, and I enjoyed the sound and light show at night with the Mexico theme. The eight floral carpets representing different UNESCO World Heritage Sites varied in intricacy and concept. These were the sites, from my favorite to least favorite:

Mexico: Pyramid of Chichen Itza
Malta: megalithic temples (Clyde should be proud of his country's artists)
Spain: a cavalcade of Sites, including the Church of St. Mary on Mount Naranco, the Santiago de Compostela Cathedral, the Mudejar Tower of El Salvador and the Church of San Pedro in Teruel, the Aqueduct of Segovia, the Alcazar of Toledo, and a bonus World Heritage Site symbol (almost too busy, though)
Germany: Speyer Cathedral (certainly the best labeled)
Belgium: Brussels City Hall with butterflies (designed by school children, so extra points granted)
Italy: a Corinthian column with a World Heritage Site symbol (of all their beautiful sites they settle on a column?!?)
Japan: a warrior painting from Nara Temple (excellent ambition, but poor execution)
Spain: a stained glass window from Sagrada Familia (a bit plain and uninspired for a potentially beautiful subject)

The carpets come down this week, but they were worth a visit.