Talk:Flag of Australia
| Flag of Australia is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||
| This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on May 10, 2006. | |||||
|
|||||
| A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day... section on September 3, 2006, September 3, 2007, September 3, 2008, September 3, 2009, September 3, 2010, and September 3, 2011. |
| WikiProject Australia | (Rated FA-class, Top-importance) | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|||||||||||||||||
| Version 0.5 (Rated FA-Class) | |
|---|---|
| This Everydaylife article has been selected for Version 0.5 and subsequent release versions of Wikipedia. It has been rated FA-Class on the assessment scale. | |
| WikiProject Heraldry and vexillology | (Rated FA-class) | |||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
- /Archive 1: January 2005 – November 2005.
- /Archive 2: January 2006 – March 2008.
[edit] Infobox
I realize that the infobox was smashing a lot of the other images down, but I think we should try to avoid if possible having a formatting issue remove some very useful information. The article is on the flag of Australia, but Australia uses different flags for different purposes, and those other flags and ensigns are not currently represented. Perhaps it could be restored, and the RAAF flag removed to make the box a bit smaller? I really don't think the current solution is the best. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arpadkorossy (talk • contribs) 17:49, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Opening of old parliament house
We only have Septimus Power's word that old parliament house was festooned with red ensigns on opening day.
I think you will find there is some debate as to whether his painting is accurate.
Steaknife (talk) 00:57, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
- There are other sources that say the flags were red ensigns. It's possible the colours were changed by the photographer in much the same way as pictures of WW2 red ensigns were often overpainted blue after the Blue was proclaimed the National flag (These altered pics are often used by monarchists to support not changing the flag). However, until evidence they were not red is found we have to accept the sources as correct. BTW...do not leave abusive messages on my user page. Use the talk page. Wayne (talk) 05:40, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
[edit]
Did the RAN exist before 1911?
121.216.232.15 (talk) 06:21, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
- No. Until 1911 it was called the Australian Commonwealth Navy and was under the control of the British Admiralty. Wayne (talk) 07:00, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
- In many info boxes the RAN White Ensign has been used instead of the RN White Ensign. Since the Australian one didn't come into existence until the 1960s which one should be used for pre 1960s RAN ships on Wikipedia? Ozdaren (talk) 11:24, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
- The practice in the Ships and Military History wikiprojects is to use the ensign the ship was flying when she was decommissioned. Anything leaving service before March 1967 should have the RN ensign. -- saberwyn 20:09, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
- Great. That's just the info I need. Many thanks. Ozdaren (talk) 21:46, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
[edit] Being bold
I've been bold. I've gone in there and done major surgery on this article.
121.216.232.15 (talk) 07:03, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
- To Paraphrase Voltair, "I may not agree with your politics, but I’ll defend to the death your right to edit". Good job but be careful with refs....you broke a couple so check the text displays properly after editing. Wayne (talk) 07:22, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
- Holy cow! It's going to take me some time to asborb all these changes... Ian Fieggen (talk) 01:07, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
I have some concern about copyright violation in the work of the anon (who appears closely related to Steakknife). I will go through and delete the images with incorrect copyright notices. Some of them could probably be used if anyone bothered to do their research properly, but we do need to consider whether having that many images is appropriate - the user appears to have an image fetish. I will also remove the text that has been directly quoted from posts to a mailing list which allows its material to be published with conditions including attribution and non-commercial use. JPD (talk) 01:45, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
Excuse me but I own the copyright for the image of the HMAS Hobart. Can that image at least reappear? It shows the Australian Blue Ensign being used as a 'battle flag' on the mainmast. Some Captains flew it there instead of the British Blue Ensign.
Actually all those images I uploaded were in order. Use some of them if not all.
I take time and resources to participate in this project.
121.216.232.15 (talk) 07:21, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
- You have been warned about those images many many times, and yet you still have not bothered to correctly give the copyright details. Why do you say you own the copyright? Who was the photographer, and when did they give the copyright to you? All these sorts of details must be included when the image is uploaded. You claimed that the image of the signed Flags Act was released under a Creative Commons license, which is completely unbelievable. Are you really saying that that is "in order"? It doesn't take that much more time to be honest. JPD (talk) 12:28, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
I was given the rights to the image by a member of the AFS. He said he took the picture. I told John Perryman of the RAN archives and he had already seen it and it was on file. A lot of people other than the Flag Society knows about it.
Get it back up there Mr Dixon! What do you have to hide!
121.216.232.15 (talk) 07:00, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
- If you really do have the rights, then give the proof on the image page, when you upload it. These details are required for every image on Wikipedia. How much more should we ask you to clarify when you have already blatantly infringed copyright and made ridiculous claims about other images? JPD (talk) 08:50, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Sockpuppetry etc
This article seems to have been attacked by a series of sockpuppet IPs, tracked back from other articles. I've removed a lot of the crap on this talk page - however, the sheer number of edits from the individual concerned on the article may need to be looked at by a subject expert. I would personally suggest reverting to a stable version and adding back only the changes people can agree on, but as a non-expert I'm loath to do that myself. Orderinchaos 10:31, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
- Most of the content seems reasonable on this occasion, but there might be copyright issues with some of it. JPD (talk) 01:03, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
can tou show me the five flag the were chosen and put together to mAKE THE aUSTRALIAN FLAG —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.108.200.15 (talk) 08:19, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Legal recognition
Is there a disconnect between
- The current specifications were published in 1934, and in 1954 the flag became legally recognised as the "Australian National Flag" (lede)
and
- A simplified version of the competition-winning design was officially approved as the Flag of Australia by King Edward VII in 1902 (in "1901 Federal Flag Design Competition")?
What I'm getting at is that the King's 1902 approval was issued under Letters Patent and it had the full force of law behind it. I acknowledge that the specific design he approved in 1902 was different from that specifed in 1934 and the one that was the subject of the 1954 Act, but in principle, he approved the flag in 1902. Would it be better to say:
- The current specifications were published in 1934, and in 1954 the flag became
legallyrecognised by parliamentary statute as the "Australian National Flag"?
Otherwise, we seem to be suggesting that the King's approval was not legally binding, and that prior to 1954 there was no official Australian flag. -- JackofOz (talk) 10:24, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
- Do you have a source for the claim concerning Letters Patent? While the Red Ensign was given an Admiralty Warrant, as required by the Merchant Navigation Act, as far as I know colonial blue ensigns were simply made "official" following authorisation by relevant departments for inclusion in the Flag Book.
- The lack of a formal instrument establishing the status of the flag certainly does not imply that it was not official, but I think the point intended in that sentence was more along the lines that the approval in 1902 certainly did not endorse language such as "Australian National Flag". In any case, the current version of the sentence certainly works. JPD (talk) 06:51, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Flag of Australia vs. Flag of New Zealand
Are the blue textures of these two flags the same or are they supposed to be different? The blues of these two flags in Wikipedia are slightly different and I am not sure if this is correct or not. Thanks,Miguel.mateo (talk) 02:20, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
- The blues on both flags are the same in real life: Pantone 280C. Because there is no universally accepted conversion from Pantone colors to RGB screen colors, most flags on Wikipedia use approximations. The Australian flag has an official specification for screen colors, so this has been adhered to, even though it does make the flag appear brighter. Ian Fieggen (talk) 03:54, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
-
- Thanks, so basically the flag of New Zealand in Wikipedia is incorrect, I am not an artist or graphic designer, but I can cleary see the differenes. Regards, Miguel.mateo (talk) 14:12, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
-
-
- It's not really a case of either being "incorrect". The Australian flag in Wikipedia is correct because it uses the officially specified RGB screen colors. The New Zealand flag in Wikipedia is also correct because although the chosen RGB screen colors have been approximated rather than officially specified, they do closely resemble an actual cloth flag in real life, which will always appear a little drab. Ian Fieggen (talk) 09:54, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
-
[edit] References
I don't understand the references in this article, beginning with: ^ a b c d e f g Australian Flags, pp. 2–3. And "kwan"?RayJohnstone (talk) 00:43, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Constant image removal
[[File:Antarctic adventure australian flag.png|thumb|The Australian Flag as depicted in the 1985 video game Antarctic Adventure.]]
Could someone tell me why my improvement to this article keeps getting removed? Surely you can see that this image provides a rich and colourful commentary on the diversity of uses for the Flag of Australia in popular culture. Despite this, my image has been removed three times and it has been tagged for so-called "speedy deletion". I strongly believe that this image provides a substantial amount of useful information to Wikipedia and greatly benefits the readers' understanding of the article in question. Keshidragon (talk) 19:52, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
- Although I'm not the one responsible, I think I can see why your image was removed from this article. Besides the copyright violation, it seems a little out of place here, especially considering that the article doesn't contain a section on the depiction of the Australian flag in media such as video games. To me, the main thing that is interesting about the image is how the flag is depicted in such low resolution (looks like 15 x 12 pixels). The image may well be useful elsewhere in Wikipedia, particularly in pages relating to low-res bitmapped graphics, video games, and the Antarctic Adventure game in particular. Ian Fieggen (talk) 00:17, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Why does someone keep altering the above image to prevent it from being visible? I would like an explanation. Keshidragon (talk) 11:56 am, Today (UTC−5)
- Because it's a copyrighted image, and they can't be used on talk pages. So stop, or you risk being blocked for a copyvio. - BilCat (talk) 16:59, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
- Right, thanks for clearing that up. Keshidragon (talk) 23:48, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
[edit] The flag debate
This is outdated: "The level of support for a change in the flag has grown since the 1980s.[1]"
There is a batch of recent polls which show this is simply not true. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.218.202.171 (talk) 07:52, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
- Then cite those polls, and we'll see if it can be added to the article. - BilCat (talk) 07:59, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
I did cite the latest Morgan Poll - April 2010 - but that edit was reverted. This poll shows the level of support has in fact the same since the 80s. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.184.180.81 (talk) 07:01, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
[edit] Missing source info
The source Australian Flags is cited numerous times throughout the article, but I can't seem to find information about the source: i.e. author, publication date, full title, etc. Can anyone help me out? -- saberwyn 08:07, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
- If it is the book by the Australian Government, I can provide that info if you still need it. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 07:03, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
[edit] Opening of old parliament house: POV dispute
There is a very good chance the Australian flags used at the opening of provisional parliament house in 1927 were blue ensigns: http://www.flagsociety.org.au/Parliament_house_puzzle.htm
The article takes Ausflag's side and says they were red. I've included a lithograph of the opening with the flags shown as blue for balance. This image appeared in Elizabeth Kwan's "Flag and Nation".
121.217.113.158 (talk) 09:21, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
- In the Septimus Power painting of the opening of Parliament in 1927 the flags are red ensigns and Union flags. Kwan says that both the red and blue were sent to the opening but there is no record of which were used apart from the Power painting. Some who want to keep the current flag argue that the artist used poetic licence and that they were really blue. Until evidence they were not red is found we have to accept the eyewitness source as correct. The lithograph you added to the article is not an eyewitness account (flags are in the wrong place) and the resolution is poor so you cant even tell what country they represent. The image is ambiguous so not a good example of anything for this article.Wayne (talk) 13:27, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
Was Septimus Power there that day?
What makes his painting any more accurate than the lithograph by the unknown artist? Why does one have anymore probative value than the other?
You get the real impression from Kwan that on the balance of probabilities the Australian flags that day were blue.
P.S. There's nothing wrong with the lithograph by the unknown artist. If it was good enough for inclusion in Flag and Nation, the seminal work on the Australian flag, don't you think it is good enough for wikipedia? You can't really see the stars on the red ensigns in Power's version of events either.
121.217.113.158 (talk) 23:08, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
- You can get whatever impression you like from Kwan but it doesn't change what is known or give it any "probative value" at all. Kwan did not say there was a balance of probability, she only says it was possible ("perhaps" is the word she uses). The power painting is by a known person and is the official painting of the event so should take precedence over a lithograph by a unknown person who was likely not even there. Hopefully using an actual image of the opening will resolve the POV "dispute" brought by a SPA who supports the blue version.Wayne (talk) 05:57, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
Was Septimus Power even there that day?
The flags were blue. They were sticklers for getting things right in those days. I've listed this matter for mediation.121.217.113.158 (talk) 06:14, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
-
- "They were sticklers for getting things right in those days." In 1927 they used the Federation flag as the national flag for the visit of the future King George VI and Queen Elizabeth and they used Red Ensigns for the 1954 visit of Queen Elizabeth, which was after the Blue had been legislated as the National flag. Dont you think mediation is a bit of overkill? Except for POV reasons there is no need to use the lithograph image in the first place. Please post the page where the mediation is listed.Wayne (talk) 07:42, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
- Photos from http://www.flickr.com/photos/old_parliament_house/3049572868/in/set-72157609644447431/ could possibly help. These are also public domain due to age in Australia (so ignore the Flickr licensing). The use of the flags can be clearly seen (both AU and UJ) but the colors, not so sure. I think it is worth nothing that multiple viewpoints can be given and, as copyrights allow, multiple images can be shown. As for this image we have now, it is very low quality and the source is unknown. No URL or anything. Ideally, it should be removed. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 07:21, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
There are two records of what flags were flown that day, both different. That's my point.
121.217.113.158 (talk) 05:17, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
- Hang on. First you tell with absolute certainty that the flags were blue, now you tell us that there were two conflicting records. I don't want you as my lawyer next time I'm in court.
- Clearly there is no certainty. It's a pointless exercise using these old pics, especially any hand coloured or B&W ones. HiLo48 (talk) 05:51, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
The article shouldn't say for certain the they flags were red in light of the lithograph by the unknown artist.
121.217.113.158 (talk) 06:41, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
- All we know is that the official painting shows red flags, some others show blue. We got this point covered already. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 06:53, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
[edit] Similar flags
There are a lot of lookalike flags in this world. Monaco's and Indonesia's are identical. But if you look up their wikipedia article they have no section entitled "Similar flags".
Take it out I say.
121.217.113.158 (talk) 09:45, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
- Both articles are smaller and very lightly sourced, compared to this article. On another article on a national flag, Japan, there are two similar flags and it was discussed in length at the article there. Given also that Ausflag repeatedly cites the fact that Australia's flag is very similar to those of surrounding nations and colonies as part of their movement to change the Australian flag, it would be not very wise to take it out. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 07:06, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
-
- Yes, I doubt of there is any movement such as that in Australia to change the flags of Monaco and Indonesia. Different situation. Different content. HiLo48 (talk) 08:05, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
- In the lead of the Monaco's article, they will state what flags it was similar to. While I mixed two different issues together (while trying to tie in the Ausflag image we have), I still think the content should not be removed. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 08:22, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, I doubt of there is any movement such as that in Australia to change the flags of Monaco and Indonesia. Different situation. Different content. HiLo48 (talk) 08:05, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
[edit] Change of gif image
I've removed the animated gif from the top of the article because it looks cheap, and no other flag article seems to have something like it. a flag article should have a simple, static depiction at the top, so I've replaced it with the box from the next section. It needs to be improved (the red ensign should probably be moved and there needs to be some more basic info - design, and adoption date and so on) but I'm not familiar enough with the wiki to do it myself. Feel free to discuss. Dallas (talk) 01:29, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
[edit] Similar flag section
Some editors have restored to the article a section that looks like this:
- The
New Zealand flag is similar to the Australian flag, both having the Union flag in the canton and the Southern Cross on the fly. However, the southern cross on the Australian flag is white, and has 5 stars, whereas on the flag of New Zealand flag there are only 4 stars, all red with a white fimbriation (outline). Australia's flag also has a seven pointed star below the Union Flag, which the New Zealand flag lacks.
- The flags of
Fiji and
Tuvalu also have the Union Flag in the canton on a blue background. Many other flags also contain the Southern Cross.
I've deleted it since it a) includes flag icons embedded in the prose, which is against WP:MOSFLAG; b) the selection of similar flags is seemingly random, with no apparent reason for mention of the flag of Fiji, but not that of the Pictairn Islands or any of the other 24 flags shown in this image; c) it doesn't make clear what importance similar flags hold to the subject of this article other than being similar; and d) it is completely unsourced.
In this revert, the editor made mention of "those who think it's an issue"; I presumed he was referring to people who want the flag changed because its design is so similar to others. If so, that can be expressed in less than a sentence, which I added here. If I'm wrong, I trust someone can clarify things for me. --Ħ MIESIANIACAL 00:26, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
- See your talk page. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 00:29, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
- One of the characteristics of the Australian flag is that it IS confused with others from time to time. It has happened at significant events. I don't like to see it happen, so yes, it is one of the reasons I would like to see it changed. But irrespective of that, to deny its similarity would be a denial of something important. I can live with the new wording but, although I know the wrong flag has been flown in the past, I'm not sure where to look for a citation. HiLo48 (talk) 00:43, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
- I found the citation. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 00:48, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
- Yes, that's good. The times when I've seen confusion within Australia have involved use of state flags. Since they came first (they were the flags of the colonies) it's pretty obvious where the idea for the Aussie flag came from. When the national flag and a state flag have both been flying in a limp wind, I've certainly heard kids asking for explanations, and parents having no answers. HiLo48 (talk) 01:06, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
- I understand now what the intent of the section was, but I don't think it was achieving that goal. Plus it had a number of already mentioned other problems. I'd also hesitate to put much more in than there already is on the matter of the flag's appearance in comparison to that of other flags. I just noticed that the section "The flag debate" is supposed to be merely a summary, with Australian flag debate being the main article for detail. In fact, I think the aforementioned section could do with some trimming. --Ħ MIESIANIACAL 03:25, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
- I found the citation. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 00:48, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
- One of the characteristics of the Australian flag is that it IS confused with others from time to time. It has happened at significant events. I don't like to see it happen, so yes, it is one of the reasons I would like to see it changed. But irrespective of that, to deny its similarity would be a denial of something important. I can live with the new wording but, although I know the wrong flag has been flown in the past, I'm not sure where to look for a citation. HiLo48 (talk) 00:43, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- ...and Hawaii.
-
-
-
I see the section's been put back again by my regular anonymous stalker, without, as usual, any input on the talk page. It would seem from the discussion above that there's agreement it doesn't serve much purpose; the anon made some changes, but the section still doesn't say anything other than that there are flags that look similar to Australia's. Well, so what? And, even if that is worth mentioning, it can be done in one sentence. --Ħ MIESIANIACAL 20:23, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
- With what arrogance have you decided that "from the discussion above...there's agreement it doesn't serve much purpose"? I certainly haven't agreed with that proposition. HiLo48 (talk) 21:19, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
- I concluded there was agreement from the lack of expressed disagreement with my criticisms and solution to them. Arrogance had nothing to do with it. --Ħ MIESIANIACAL 21:31, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
- The IP stated it was the "status quo" to have that section. I merged the content. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 20:48, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
- The IP said he was restoring the status quo and then proceeded to change the status quo, anyway. Regardless, simply stating, in a separate section, no less, that the flag is similar to other flags doesn't explain how that fact relates to the debate around the flag. Your merge was an appropriate fix. Thank you. --Ħ MIESIANIACAL 21:31, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
[edit] Australian National Flag Day
Why does Australian National Flag Day redirect here and not to the article Flag Day (Australia)?
Gloriousrevolution (talk) 05:13, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
- Bad redirect, support changing to redirecting Australian National Flag Day to Flag Day (Australia) Chipmunkdavis (talk) 05:22, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
We have a seconder. Gloriousrevolution (talk) 05:00, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
[edit]
The article could mention that the practice of the navy was to fly a large ANF from the mainmast as a battle flag when a warship went to action stations. Banjo Patterson wrote about this in his poem "We're all Australians now" when the HMAS Sydney did it when she sunk the SS Emden at the beginning of WW1.
Gloriousrevolution (talk) 07:00, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
[edit] RGB or Pantone
Could we possibly replace the Infobox RGB flag with the Pantone one? The New Zealand Flag already uses a pantone one so why no us? It should at least appear correctly is all I'm saying... AnimatedZebra (talk) 15:45, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
- The main reason why the NZ flag article is using the main image as Pantone is there is no RGB specifications for the flag. What we usually do is go with RGB first with flag colors (in images), then Pantone. Both flags appear in the article and it is fine. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 18:49, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
-
- We could swap them around? That way it's the first one you see. AnimatedZebra (talk) 20:01, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
- I am going to say no. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 20:15, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
[edit] AustraliaScan research
I found this:
The annual AustraliaSCAN (which surveys 2000 Australians) has found that support for keeping the Australian flag has risen from 57per cent in 2001 to 65per cent in 2011. Support for changing the flag dropped from 19per cent in 2001 to 13per cent in 2011. We love the flag ... despite the fact that it looks exactly like New Zealand and is a derivative of Great Britain, Randell says.***
Let's work out a way to include it in the article. There's a trend there consistent with the other polls. Also, 13% is not a significant minority.
Actually a figure like that, calling it a "debate" is almost an insult to the flag Australia adopted around Federation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.164.34.60 (talk) 10:39, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
[edit] Flag "debate"
There's mounting evidence the minority in Australia for a new national flag is no longer signficant: it's the settled will of the people that the existing design remains.
You'd have to think that will be reflected in changes to the article at some stage.
Let's talk about it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.164.34.60 (talk) 10:51, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
- Feel free to think about it, but Wikipedia is not a forum, so discussing it here is not appropriate. HiLo48 (talk) 02:19, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
Support for change may have collapsed to 13%. As of today there's a flag debate. One that's being kept artifically alive.
A very telling figure: it's not going to be in our day.
58.164.34.60 (talk) 08:15, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page, but the references will not show without a {{Reflist}} template or a <references /> tag; see the help page.
- Wikipedia featured articles
- Featured articles that have appeared on the main page
- Selected anniversaries (September 2006)
- Selected anniversaries (September 2007)
- Selected anniversaries (September 2008)
- Selected anniversaries (September 2009)
- Selected anniversaries (September 2010)
- Selected anniversaries (September 2011)
- FA-Class Australia articles
- Top-importance Australia articles
- WikiProject Australia articles
- Wikipedia Version 0.5
- Wikipedia CD Selection-0.5
- Wikipedia Release Version
- FA-Class heraldry and vexillology articles