Antarctica -- all land south of 60 degrees S -- is already protected by the Antarctic Treaty.
The purpose of declaring any geography as a World Heritage Site is to protect its culture -- Antarctica has none; and its physical significance. There is no reason to add the burden of declaring it a World Heritage Site.
yes and no no because it might irritate the animals yes because we can visit
No. Antarctica is governed by the Antarctic Treaty, so there is no reason to add the burden of a World Heritage Site administration to this continent.
Yes, the Kaymay Bay National Park should be a world heritage site.
All land on planet Earth south of 60 degrees, which includes Antarctica, is governed by the Antarctic Treaty (1960). It is not necessary to add the burden of being a World Heritage Site to its protection.
yes
Stonehenge is a World Heritage site.
Because Uluru is one of very few that is both a natural and cultural World Heritage Site.
Alcatraz is not a World Heritage site at this time.
yes, yes it is a world heritage site
No, Wave Rock is not a World Heritage Site.
Yes, I think Charminar is undoubtedly one of the historical monument of India. I thinks WHS should include in world heritage site list.
The City of Valletta was declared a World Heritage Site in 1980.