Talk:Flag of Scotland/GA1

GA Review

I am failing this article. The problem I have with this is the omission of key facts. I fixed some of them myself, but this needs a lot more work than before I feel this is GA work. The main facts I feel that is missing is a definite source on what the proportions of the white saltire are. I understand a little bit about the ratios, but you need to find out who uses what ratio or cut it down to the ones that we know of. Also, you need to cite a source on what the hexidecimal colors for the Pantone 300 shade are or just remove it entirely. Overall, you need to use the http://toolserver.org/~magnus/makeref.php tool for the references and occasional use http://toolserver.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/webchecklinks.py?page=Flag_of_Scotland to check for URLs. I will work with you to help with all of these areas, since flags are my specialty.

Reviewer: User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 23:34, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi User:Zscout370. I have had a go at your suggested changes. Where does the article now stand with regard to:

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:

B. MoS compliance:
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources:

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

C. No original research:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

B. Focused:
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:

.....................................Regards Endrick Shellycoat 13:21, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This article is heavily POV. It seems to be a Nationalist POV with poor sourcing and wrong/exaggerated interpretations/synthesis . Just a few things I've found:

1. “Royal Standard of Scotland” is not a “state flag”;

2. “loyalty and nationality” can also be demonstrated by flying the Union Jack (http://www.lyon-court.com/lordlyon/235.html) and always has the prominent position (http://www.lyon-court.com/lordlyon/236.html);

3. “other colours for the flag's background, including red and black, have also been recorded”. Not true, the source describes differing backgrouds for the Saltire as a Scotch Emblem. It states “… national emblem is on soldier’s uniforms, rather than as a flag”;

4. “Adopted: Circa 1180”. Not true, this article is about the Flag of Scotland not the Saltire emblem;

5. “The Scottish heraldic term”, I think we can dropped the Scottish, it is no different in English heraldry;

6. “The tincture of the Saltire can appear as either silver (Argent) or white…”, the reference for this is to the College of Arms and not to the Court of the Lord Lyon. Why?;

7. “the shade of blue most likely being determined by the dye available at the time”, mere speculation with no reference;

8. “earliest reference to the Saint Andrew's Cross as a flag is to be found in the Vienna Book of Hours”, the book makes no mention that if was used specifically by the Scotch;

9. “The earliest use of the Saltire as a symbol of Scotland can be traced to 1180”, not supported by the source. In 1180 an image of St. Andrew was in use. Further it was “used in Scotland” the source makes not mention at that time it is was a symbol of Scotland;

10. “Further evidence shows that by…” here’s the crux; this should read “The first certain illustration of the St. Andrew’s Cross on a blue field as we have it today is in the armorial of Sir David Lindsay in 1542AD.” from The Story of Scotland’s flag, Graham Bartram;

11. “The Scottish Government has decreed that the Saltire will fly on all its buildings every day from 8am until sunset.” Not true, the reference given relates only to flag days;

12. “In recent years, embassies of the United Kingdom have also flown the Saltire to mark St Andrew's Day”. Not true, the source only mentions celebrations;

13. “planning permission to fly the Saltire from a vertical flagpole is not required”, not in reference given and not a reliable source;

14. “Unusually, the ferry operator Caledonian MacBrayne flies the Saltire as a Jack on vessels which have a bow staff, including when such vessels are underway.[28] The world famous Paddle Steamer Waverley also adopts this practice when operating in and around the Firth of Clyde.[29]”. Links to a couple of images. No reference that this is a policy of CMB or that the flag flying wasn’t a one-off on St.Andrews Day, or that the image is indeed genuine etc. Not RS and completely irrelevant;

15. “due to its increased popularity among private citizens for use on water.”, Not supported by reference;

16. “Other Scottish companies have also used the saltire in similar ways.”, no reference given;

17. Use outside Scotland: Only Nova Scotia is relevant here. This section tries to imply that the other flags are somehow derived from or based upon the Flag of Scotland, which is of course, not true;

18. “evidence of a Scottish variant, whereby the Scottish cross was uppermost, does exist”, FOTW is not a reliable source. Anyone can join and upload their own opinions;

19. “seen limited and possibly unofficial use” neither source say this;

20. You cannot link to Graham Bartram's online PDF at the Flag Institute. By providing a URL you are circumnavigating the members login page. This is a private area for FI members only.

Getting tired now. SatDen (talk) 16:53, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello SatDen. Firstly, welcome to Wikipedia, quite a first post. Honoured that this article prompted you to terminate what must be a lengthy career on Wikipedia as an IP, and bring you 'out of the closet', so to speak. Now, with my assumption of "Good Faith" on your part firmly in place, (something you might try to remember when banding about accusations as per your opening gambit), I'll try to address your points.

1: "The 'Lion Rampant' Flag. This is not a national flag - its correct use is restricted to only a few Great Officers (of State) who officially represent The Sovereign, including;... - Its use by other, non-authorised persons is an offence under the Act of Parliament 1672 cap. 47 and 30 & 31 Vict. cap. 17." Source=Lyon Court.
Use of this flag is restricted by the State, through an Act of Parliament, to a few Great Officers of State. Given that fact, and that Lyon states that it is not a "national flag", what is it then if not a State flag?
2:Correct, however this article is not about the Union Flag, but the Saltire - it is not a contest of loyalty between the two, and the source remains correct. Feel free to cite the ref in the relevant article, if you feel so inclined.
3: "red" relates to the referenced work by Bartram, in which he states "The first certain use of a plain St. Andrew’s Cross flag - but the field was red, not blue - occurs in 1503AD in the Vienna Book of Hours". You are however correct as to Black, my mistake. Furthermore, in relation to point 8, Bartram does indeed make no claim that this 1503 example was as you state "used specifically by the Scotch" ("Scotch"?), therefore the reference to red in connection with the Scots will also be removed. Instead, a Flag Institute ref stating "The blue background dates back to at least the 15th century" will be included.
4: 1180 - fair point - Flag Institute states "1286". As it cannot be accused of having a "Nationalist POV" I'm sure you'll have no objection to their date being used. Similarly, re. 9, ref will be made to "The first use as a national symbol that we know of was on the seal of the Guardians of Scotland."
5: The ref in question (NAS) states "The Scottish heraldic term for such a cross is a 'saltire', from the old French word 'saultoir', meaning a type of stirrup". Use of "Scottish heraldry" also wikilinks nicely to the appropriate wiki article. If you don't like the term, you can always take it up with the relevant body.
6: I'll return that volly - why not the College of Arms? According to you Scottish heraldry "'is no different" to English. One of the few exceptions which correspond with your general assertion being in relation to tinctures: The general armory of England, Scotland, Ireland, and wales: comprising a ...By Sir Bernard Burke (1864) details on pages Xi-Xii those tinctures to be "met in British Arms" - there being no distinction between the two re. colours.
7: Source book to be recovered ASAP.
8: See 3
9: See 4
10: No issue with proposed alternative wording.
11: Source states "The Saltire should now where possible be flown every day from Scottish Government buildings." Your point?
12: Source states "We also have embassies in around 70 countries flying the saltire or hosting balls, ceilidhs or receptions for St Andrew's Day". Article states "In recent years, embassies of the United Kingdom have also flown the Saltire to mark St Andrew's Day". Don't see the issue here also.
13: Source states "No planning permission is needed to fly this flag on the flagpole". As for RS, if I were to buy a flagpole from this source, run up the Saltire to fall foul of planning regs I'd have a pretty good case against Harrison's in court. Another source quotes an unnamed Aberdeen Council spokesperson as stating "There are some instances where flagpoles need planning permission, depending on their height, though the Saltire itself would not require permission". If it is such an issue for you, it can be removed.
14: Images link directly to company websites therefore RS applies. A quick trawl through company image gallery will satisfy that CalMac/Waverley indeed have such a policy, therefore while document specifying such is not in public domain, WP:Common applies. Your suggestion of a "one-off on St.Andrews Day" doesn't discount the fact that it occurs, and "completely irrelevant" is merely your own POV.
15: Article states "increased popularity among private citizens for use on water". Source states ensign is "making a comeback", source immediately prior to that states "It is still used unofficially by private citizens for use on water." The problem here being...?
16: Ref will be provided.
17: Fair point, section will be re-titled Similar flags used outside Scotland. If I had a pound for every Brit that has arrived in Tenerife and asked why there are Scottish flags everywhere...
18: FOTW would indeed be an issue if it were the only source which related to that flag. The fact that it is not the only source prevents its inclusion from being an issue as the information does not rely upon FOTW and that site alone.
19: The sources in fact contradict each other: McMillan/Stewart state "This flag had official recognition" and indicate a supporting reference. Bartram on the other hand describes it as "Unofficial". The wording is a compromise agrreed for the section as it appears in the Union Flag article.
20: If it is directly accessable on the web, which it is, then it's fair game, so long as due accreditation is given. How the FI secures information from non-members is a matter for them.

Will make alterations in due course. Tiredness must be catching. Endrick Shellycoat 01:32, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DoneEndrick Shellycoat 13:12, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FOTW is an issue that I have also faced when I took articles to FAC. Sure, there are times when the information posted there has sources or law text, but a lot of the older messages, we don't. (FYI, I post there regularly and used to edit the Belarus and Moldova pages there). We are getting better at it. Now, what I would suggest is if you do keep FOTW, find another source that backs up that same claim. I will help you on those. I will look at each of the comments too and see what I think about it. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 18:45, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, here are a start of my responses.

http://www.lyon-court.com/lordlyon/237.html says the flag can only by the Royal Family according to Act of Parliament 1672 cap. 47 and 30 & 31 Vict. cap. 17. A use of the flag by the Royal family is given at http://www.royal.gov.uk/MonarchUK/Symbols/UnionJack.aspx However, the flag was given permission in 1934 by a Royal Warrant by King George V for use by "subjects as a mark of loyalty."
http://www.culture.gov.uk/images/consultations/TheGovernanceofBritainflagflying.pdf says the Union Flag must be flown on Government buildings owned by the British Government. Buildings owned by the Scottish Government have their own regulations, which is set by the Scottish Parliament. The issue about the superior issue is not related to POV, it is related to proper flag protocol. Since Scotland is a part of the United Kingdom until you pull off what we did in 1776, the Union Jack is flown in a superior position. It is explained at http://www.culture.gov.uk/flagflying/protocol.html#gov, along with the "which side is up" issue.

User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 19:07, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Replies to ES:

1. FIC does not function by assuming a flag defaults to one identity use if it fails to fall in another (see sec.5 http://www.fiav.org/FlagInformationCode.pdf). In addition, the reference states, “…primary purpose is to identify nationality rather than some other characteristic (such as the rank of an individual, the existence of a specific government or military institution, or some other concept)”. The Royal Standard of Scotland is a flag of the Monarch. Its use is restricted to the Monarch and some Great Officers who officially represent her; it is not a government flag. A comparison with other Royal_standard’s or even Presidential_Flag’s shows none of these are considered a state flag. If you still think this is a State Flag, you need to cite a reliable source. The current justification is a WP:SYN and prohibited in Wikipedia;

4. 1286 is a reference to the Seal of the Guardians of Scotland with the reverse having a representation of St Andrew on the X-shaped cross. Bartram's article clarifies this. The date has to be 1542AD;

11. OK, I confess I missed that line. However, the words “decreed” and “will” are too strong and not supported by the reference. They are ”guidance notes” and “should” be flown;

12. OK, I clicked on the wrong ref.;

13. “It doesn’t matter if you have a right to sue them, they are not a legal authority;

14. Images do not prove it ever was or still is a policy. This is WP:SYN. All you can write is that on one occasion the flag was used;

15. Still can’t find this in the ref. The ref (http://www.scotsindependent.org/features/orgs/scottish_flagtrust.htm) does not state this; FOTW is not an RS, plus you have another WP:SYN: the ensign appearing in flag catalogues due to private demand;

19. McMillan doesn’t have a supporting ref. ; it his interpretation of a quote – the same quote that W.G. Perrin (seen as the father of British Vexiollogy) resolves to CoSG on top; Both Bartram and his predecessor, William Crampton (Observer Book of Flags) claim the flag was unofficial; 3 against 1, and McMillan was not seen as a Flag authority; There is no evidence of this flag’s use;

20. It isn’t fair game, it is in effect, unauthorized access (even if the FI have got poor security). I’m not saying you cannot cite it, just that you cannot link to it;

SatDen (talk) 22:11, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

~~What is the URL in question from the FI that you have questions about? User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 22:16, 14 December 2009 (UTC)~~[reply]

The link in question is linked from http://www.flaginstitute.org/index.php?location=12.3 which is a website that can be accessed by the public. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 22:23, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, it is this one: http://www.flaginstitute.org/pdfs/Graham%20Bartram.pdf SatDen (talk) 22:48, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That is linked from http://www.flaginstitute.org/index.php?location=12.3. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 23:17, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, not paying attention, you are correct. SatDen (talk) 22:39, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello SatDen. In reply to yours...
1. Fair point - won't labour it. (Has been removed by User:Zscout370)
4. From UK Flag Registry: "Flag Date: 1286" I hear what you say with regard to 1542 and, to use your own words, "the first certain illustration". However, to take information from one source only to argue against it on the basis of information from practically the same identical source is a path I'd rather avoid; it also brings the FI into question as a WP:RS. The article deals with dates sufficiently IMHO.
11. The Scot Govt. Flag Flying Guidance, under the heading "RULES FOR HOISTING FLAGS ON BUILDINGS OF THE SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT. Issue No. 13 (Valid from January 2009)", states: "The Saltire should now where possible be flown every day from Scottish Government buildings". This is a "Rule" (albeit under review) which appears in a "Guidance" document. I'm not getting into the semantics of it, therefore I've inserted the words "should, where possible", but it does state that it is a "Rule", therefore "ruled" will be inserted also.
13. New ref. from legal authority insterted by User:Zscout370
14. WP:Common still applies. "All you can write is that on one occasion the flag was used." I'll reword accordingly.
15. Ref appears on image caption: article, image. The section re. manufacturers has been removed by User:Zscout370, however I'll reinsert the ref to show actual use.
19. "McMillan was not seen as a Flag authority" POV or do you have a ref?. As to the interpretation of the reference, wiki is not judge and jury in such cases of differeing views in published works, however I'll reword accordingly. "No evidence of this flag's use" - Slezer c1693,The Ensigns, Colours or Flags of the Ships at Sea: Belonging to The several Princes and States in the World 1704, The designs of Sir Henry St George, 1707. Furthermore, "Some Scots vessels used an unofficial version where the St.Andrew's Cross went over the St.George's cross", source = Flag Institute. Are you calling into question the Flag Institute as a RS? If you've got a ref to support your assertion that there is "No evidence of this flag's use" then insert it in the article. Also, see simiar discussion here: Talk:Union_Flag#Scottish_variant_to_1707
20. 1 2 3 4 Q.E.D.
Endrick Shellycoat 11:13, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A few final comments:

4. The note comment on your FI ref. clarifies the date: “The first use as a national symbol that we know of was on the seal of the Guardians of Scotland.”. If the article was about the Saltire as a Scotch emblem it would be OK, but this is specifically about the Flag of Scotland;

15. “… is making a comeback!” given the exclamation mark at then end, this is clearly a tongue-in-cheek statement;

19. Under Wikipedia rules it is you who needs to prove McMillan’s vexiollogy credentials, not for me to disprove. However, if one compares him to Perrin (using Google Scholar) it is clear from the number of citations that he not of the same calibre. In addition to Perrin’s correct explanation of the quote misinterpreted by McMillan, Bartram, Crampton and now the FI website state that the flag is unofficial – that’s 4 flag authority sources. With no other support for McMillan, his view can only be seen as a fringe theory and thrown out under Wikipedia rules. Slezer’s is nothing more that an etching (probably not drawn by him) and Sir Henry St George can only write hear say. TECFSS is the only real reference (probably the source for the FI’s claim) but even that’s not conclusive. Personally I think the FI’s giving the benefit of the doubt.

20. Yes, apologies my mistake.

SatDen (talk) 22:38, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is alright SatDen. What I am going to try and do is use what I know and what I can find to get rid of the FOTW references, or have the claim backed up by another source. This is something I did at the Flag of Japan article, where only FOTW links serve as translations of Japanese law. If the comment is about the Scottish Ensign, I only found it was in official use until the unification of Scotland and England to the United Kingdom. After then, no idea on the use. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 04:12, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In that case SatDen, my final tuppenceworth;

4. I'll live with 1542 - I'm not seeking to claim longevity over the Dannebrog or similar here so I'm not losing sleep over it;

15. I wouldn't place the same inference on ! as you appear to. Fact is, I purchased one from a manufacturer previously linked to on the article for a friend in the middle east, and Hot Toddy II did indeed fly the same from either the port or starboard spreader, (can't recall which), therefore they are available to purchase and are indeed used. (have also seen one on Loch Lomond recently so I'll watch out for it next visit and try to capture an image). There was also the Mail on Sunday article therefore, the ! on the Jean de la Lune image caption aside, in short, the ensign:

has since 1707 been unofficial (Image:select category "Nation Building & Colonialism" from menu on right of screen)
is currently available to purchase from at least two flag manufacturers
is currently used by private citizens on water
is/was subject to a campaign (I'll assume as yet unsuccessful) to obtain some form of contemporary official recognition.

On that basis, it is worthy of note in the article IMHO;

19. The section's current wording would I hope satisfy us both on that score. (Bartram/FI effectively count as a single source IMHO). Personaly, I've always regarded "interlaced" as an odd description for the King's Colours, and would not be happy if McMillan's interpretation wasn't given at least a qualified mention, which it is in the current wording. Slezer's credentials are not in question here so I'm not even going down that avenue of discussion. As for Henry St George, for him not only to write but to go to the effort drawing a design for presentation to HMQ, one with which the Scots members of the PC were presumably familiar and indeed lobbied for its selection, on the basis of hear-say as you put it is stretching things just a wee bit, don't you think?

I'm currently trying to improve the flow of things, leaving references as is, therefore I'll change the date A.S.A.P. I trust that this will leave the article in a more satisfactory state than when you first encountered it. Endrick Shellycoat 14:38, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GA Nomination #2

If at first you don't succeed... Endrick Shellycoat 11:47, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]