Jump to content

Talk:Union Jack

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Davidmaxwaterman (talk | contribs) at 18:57, 5 August 2012 (Is there a 'Standard' side for pole?). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Former good article nomineeUnion Jack was a Social sciences and society good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
June 23, 2008Good article nomineeNot listed

Template:Findnotice

Ratio of flags in History section

In the "Since 1801" section, which includes a flowchart of the combination of crosses to form the current flag, the images used are in the 3:5 ratio instead of 1:2. Is this intentional? -- RealGrouchy (talk) 13:46, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not symmetrical

Does anyone know why the Union Flag is not perfectly reflectionally symmetrical? I had always thought it was, until I read this article. Are there some hysterical raisins behind it? JIP | Talk 18:10, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hysterical indeed. I don't know about reasons (or raisins, for that matter), but consider the following. The Cross of St. Patrick as it appears in the Union Flag now is styled so that, were the Cross of St George to be removed, it would not look like a cross. I think this is to avert ill luck or the suggestion of blasphemy in obscuring a Christian symbol (albeit by another cross). For people were very pious in former times: barbaric, maybe, but none is more pious than a barbarian.
Nuttyskin (talk) 16:13, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The flag of Scotland is the white "X"-shaped cross of St. Andrew on a blue background. When it was first combined in 1601 with the red St. George's cross of England, the white border remained because there is a heraldry rule (Rule of tincture) that says you can't mix (abut) two colors. You need a metal, gold or silver, which are respectively represented by yellow and white, to separate them.

When the Red "X" for St. Patrick was added in 1801, it also needed a border to separate it from the blue. If it were centered on the white, it would have made Scotland's symbol look as though it were only a border for Ireland's, naturally the Scots didn't want that.

If you look at the illustration under design specifications, each diagonal is six units wide. The red cross is two units and if you think of the white cross as two units, you have a unit on each side as a border. So, both countries symbols are the same size showing equality between the two.

Flipping the red and white gives each Kingdom "top" billing in half the flag, like co-equal billings in movies where one star's name is on the upper right and the other's is to the left, but a bit lower.

Because Scotland was in the union first, it got the prime spot at the top hoist (left) and Ireland got to be above Scotland on the right. I apologize for the length of this answer, but hope it helps.Goldnpuppy (talk) 17:12, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK, this part: When the Red "X" for St. Patrick was added in 1801, it also needed a border to separate it from the blue. If it were centered on the white, it would have made Scotland's symbol look as though it were only a border for Ireland's, naturally the Scots didn't want that. seems like a good enough explanation. I understand the Union flag is made up of three different crosses: an upright one for England, and two diagonal ones for Scotland and Ireland. I just never thought of the heraldrical rules that forbid mixing two colours without a metal in between, perhaps because I know next to nothing about heraldry. Which is a bit silly, when you come to think of it: I'm European, where heraldry was invented, and I like to look at the coats of arms of municipalities both in my home country Finland and other European countries, and am proud of this tradition, but the excessively detailed rules of what you can place where just seem needlessly complex to me. (Not that I would approve of photographs of real-life people being placed on coats of arms, as was suggested by a Finnish tabloid reporter once, but it was instantly turned down.) JIP | Talk 20:37, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is a beautiful 'geometric' construction of both the "National Flag" and the "War Flag". First we make a 3:4 rectangle (landscape) we know that the diagonal by Pythagoras is "5" (3:4:5, 9 + 16 = 25) Next we combine four "3:4:5" rectangles to make a "6:8:10" rectangle (landscape) and inscribe a circle, radius "5" centered at the "+" where the four "3:4:5" rectangles meet. Above and below the 3:5 ratio 'War Flag' will be a border of 2 x 10, These will consist of two 1:2 ratio National Flags each side (portrait draped) and two larger National Flags 2:4 ratio. (center) The position of all the vertical, horizontal & diagonal lines become obvious. Pythagorean triangulation was an essential tutorial for all Naval Cadets. Drafting the "War Flag" with ruler, pencil and compass was a nice introduction to the art of navigation and survey. User:JIP's answer is a good one. (I will attempt to upload a JPG illustration of this geometric construction of the "War Flag") — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alastair Carnegie (talkcontribs) 19:43, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Flag of Hawaii update needed

According to one story, the King of Hawaii asked the British mariner, George Vancouver, during a stop in Lahaina, what the piece of cloth flying from his ship was. Vancouver replied that it represented his king's authority.

This "story" needs to be updated to match our article content over at Flag_of_Hawaii#Origins. Viriditas (talk) 07:15, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Scottish Independence

What happens to the flag if Scotland leaves the Union? Pseud (talk) 11:14, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This doesn't need to go into the article unless it does happen, which it probably wouldn't until at least 2016. The chances are though, the flag would just lose the blue background. Bigdon128 (talk) 16:29, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Chances are the Union Flag won't change at all. The possibility of Scotland's cession is just that, cession; not the break up of the United Kingdom (which won't be keen on changing the world's most identifiable flag). Alexsau1991 (talk) 19:49, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dimensions

Hi, I don't understand this diagram:

It is not possible to interpret this without knowing the angle at which the 6 unit "width" of the diagonal stripes is supposed to be measured. The text seems to imply that this measurement should be square to the diagonal lines, but in the diagram it is clearly shown as non-square, but with no angle or other reference indicating exactly how it should be measured. 86.160.212.146 (talk) 20:17, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Do they mean centimeters, millimeters, feet, inches? Robby The Penguin (talk) (contribs) 20:19, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That isn't relevant. Any units can be used; only the proportions matter. The point is that it is not possible to determine the relative width of the diagonal stripes from this diagram since the six units is measured at an indeterminable angle. 86.160.212.146 (talk) 20:24, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's indeterminable because of the corner, then? Robby The Penguin (talk) (contribs) 20:26, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No, it's because the measurement of six units is shown to be not square across the strip (at right angles to the edges of the strip), but at some odd and unspecified angle. 86.160.212.146 (talk) 20:29, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Agree, it should be a right angle. William Avery (talk) 20:56, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think that you're reading way too much into an artifact of the limitations of the dimensioning tool that the image creator had available. Just because the dimension leaders and arrows aren't perpendicular to the seven gray lines that define the St Andrew's and the St Patrick's crosses doesn't invalidate the dimension. Similarly, if one were to draw extension lines from the flag to the dimension leaders, you will find that the arrows don't properly line up. Gasp. And of course there is the adjacent text that explicitly states the width of the diagonal portions of the flag.
Trappist the monk (talk) 23:15, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If that distance is supposed to be measured at right angles to the diagonal lines, then the way it is currently drawn is quite obviously incorrect. If I had to guess how to draw the flag from this diagram, I would measure six units at 45 degrees to the flag edges, which we seem to be saying is wrong. The fact that the diagram and the accompanying text are inconsistent is not an argument for retaining the status quo. 86.160.212.146 (talk) 23:39, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know that there is any hard and fast rule that requires dimension leaders to be at any specific angle with respect to the object for which they specify a distance. Clearly, the whole image isn't "properly" dimensioned—but so what? This is Wikipedia, I encourage you to improve upon what is here.
You state that the "diagram and the accompanying text are inconsistent", but you don't state your reasoning. How are they inconsistent?
Trappist the monk (talk) 12:42, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a 'Standard' side for pole?

About the section on flying and when the flag is considered upside-down; there is mention of which *side* the hoist/pole is: "can also be statically displayed incorrectly with the hoist on the right", but it isn't clear which way that flag should be flown if there is no pole at all. Is it somehow 'standard' or preferred that the pole is on the left? Often, as in the images shown, no indication of which side the pole is, in which case I don't see how if can be claimed that the flag is upside-down since it can be counter-claimed that the pole is on the right. Does anyone know about this?

Davidmaxwaterman (talk) 18:57, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]