Talk:Nordic Cross flag
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
- 1 The flag of the Sovereign Military Order of Malta
- 2 The flag of Lewis
- 3 The Union Jack
- 4 Wilmington
- 5 Collation
- 6 Former flag of Schelswig-Holstein
- 7 Unofficial flags of Sweden
- 8 Policy
- 9 Teutonic-Celtic flag
- 10 Nordisk Flaggsallskap
- 11 Flag of Verona
- 12 Image:Flag of Iceland - 1914 Proposal.png
- 13 Flag of Barra
- 14 Flag of Pärnu
- 15 Vendelbrog shoud be there too!
- 16 Cornwall, Saint Piran's Flag
- 17 NOTE: Large part of this article copied to Commons
- 18 There is no substantial evidence supporting the claim of the German "1871-1892" flag
- 19 Newfoundland, Greenland, and Sami
- 20 More Norwegian flags
- 21 Fair use rationale for Image:Fbnfvv.png
- 22 Is the Scanian flag unofficial?
- 23 Image copyright problem with Image:Malady Front.gif
- 24 Nordic cross or similar design?
- 25 Flag of FC St. Pauli (football team)
- 26 Controversy
- 27 Unofficial flags
- 28 "Cross flag" redirect
- 29 royal but not that royal
- 30 Gonfalon
- 31 Scandinavian Flag?
- 32 Unofficial Flags (Scotland)
- 33 Svalbard Unnoficial Flags
- 34 Church of Sweden
- 35 Historical origin
- 36 United Kingdom: Unofficial Flag of Northern England
- 37 Word breaks
- 38 just found a pretty obvious nordic cross in puerto rico
- 39 Groningen (province)
The flag of the Sovereign Military Order of Malta
This flag should be mentioned in the section "Flags elsewhere that feature the Nordic Cross or similar design"
- Isn't an offset cross.Inge 18:21, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
The flag of Lewis
I am not sure if this flag is really a Nordic Cross flag. It really depends on how you interpret it, and of course what the "designer" wanted it to mean. It would be nice to find out more about the meaning and origin of this flag. According to an entry on the Flags of the World page it is supposed to be a Nordic Cross. Thats why I added it Inge 19:14, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
- Yes, it would be nice to have more information, and official sources. See Talk:Flag of Lewis. --Eddi (Talk) 23:12, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
- I realise I have added some questionable flags here. I am especially thinking of Lewis and Melbourne. When I started the article I only planned to have official flags, but more flags creapt in and I decided to add all the ones I could find already on Wiki. So the only criteria to get in the article should be that the flag has to meet the core definition of a Nordic cross flag. But I am certainly open to removing someInge 23:28, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
- The flags in this article may or may not have official status, but the information about being Nordic cross flags should at least be verified before inclusion, preferably by official sources. With respect to sources, it seems like Flags of the World uncritically displays flags and information about flags that its contributors themselves classify as dubious, so I think we should be careful with citing FOTW or linking to them under "External links" in flag articles. --Eddi (Talk) 00:10, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
- The big problem is that there is generally no official information about unofficial flags. Official agencies tend to pretend they don't exist. But like the flag of Shetland some of them suddenly become official.Inge 00:36, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
The Union Jack
What about the Union Jack, and related flags? They sure contain a cross, anyway, and I guess they're somehow related to the scandinavian cross. Maybe deserves a mention on the page? 184.108.40.206 09:54, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
- The Union Jack is based on the flag of England, the flag of Scotland and the former flag of Ireland, which in turn are based on St. George's cross, St. Andrew's cross and St. Patrick's cross, respectively. All of those are Christian crosses, but neither are Scandinavian crosses. --Eddi (Talk) 12:52, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
- I think St. George's cross should be mentioned. At least as a similar design, but probably not related. It would at least clear up things for Scandinavians who thinks the flag of england has a nordic design. carewolf 13:45 28 January 2007
This flag was interesting. I emediately thought it was strange to have the Swedish flag used like this. Does anyone know if Wilmington has sought permission to do this? National flags are after all protected by all countries. Inge 22:15, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
- I don't know exactly, but doesn't the emblem make it a separate flag? Compare e.g. the flag of Ghana vs. Bolivia, or Senegal vs. Mali, or Andorra vs. Tchad and Romania. --Eddi (Talk) 01:07, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
The use of the Swedish flag is because of the original Swedish settlers of Wilmington/Ft. Christina. I am not aware of any treaty that requires a municipality to get permission from a country to use a similar flag design. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 19:34, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
- The United States are obliged to protect for example the Swedish flag from being misused. The exact terms for this around the world vary. In some countries nothing will happen if you desecrate a foreign nations flag and in others you might go to jail. In some countries it is a matter of law and others a matter of good conduct. I reacted to the Wilmington flag because it is perseived as desecration of a flag if you draw or write on it without official permission(increasingly common among football supporters). So I thought it would at least be courteus of Wilmington to ask permission when they whant to essentially take the Swedish flag with writing and drawings on it as their official flag. And it would be really interesting if there had been some sort of correspondance on the matter. But as Eddi points out this flag is probably counted as a new and different flag from the Swedish one. Inge 09:30, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
I am not sure what the source of your statement "national flags are protected by all countries" is. Nothing in United law, to my knowledge, prevents a citizen from using or even desecrating a flag (including, incidentally, the United States flag - see Flag_burning#The_United_States). Even if the flag of Wilmington was a Swedish flag defaced with some defamatory statement about Swedes, I see little that any government body could do to force a change. --Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 18:19, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
- OK,OK I wasn't acusing anyone of anything. I don't want Wilmington to apologise to Sweden or stop using the flag. I was just wondering out of curiosity. What was the basis of the flag and if there had been some sort of correspondance between Sweden and Wilmington. After all it is not to my knowledge common for regional American flags to be so much based on the flag of a different country. And it would at least have been polite of them. Inge 20:02, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
- I still don't understand why it would have been polite. Nonetheless, many local US flags are based on those of European countries connected to their founding. For example, the Flag of New York City is a defaced version of the Dutch flag in use at New York's founding. The Flag of Alabama is identical with the Flag of St. Patrick. etc.Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 15:08, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
- The first part of your post was very interesting. The last sentance might indicate I have given an impression that somehow something here needs defending :) I am not prosecuting anyone (I hope you don't think that). This is ment as an exercise to obtain information to quell my curiosity.Inge 15:31, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
I have reverted the changes in alphabetical order by Leftist and Eddi, since I believe the collation rules of the English version of the Latin alphabet should be used here. Most people who are unfamiliar with the Scandinavian languages will look under a when searching for å, just like þ is generally seen as a variant form of t by those who are not aware of its proper place in the Icelandic alphabet. Hope you don't mind this! =] Regards // Big Adamsky • BA's talk page 13:56, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
- I'm not too concerned about collation, and my edit was more thematic than alphabetic. I would like to suggest that we in the top section list sovereign nations (D/F/I/N/S) before autonomous entities (F/Å), and in the section of flags without Nordic cross list the international Nordic Council first, then autonomous entities and similar (G/S), and other entities at the end. --Eddi (Talk) 15:48, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
- I think we should do it the proper way when we know what the proper way is :) . The Æ, Ø and Å have their fixed places in the alphabet. I believe we should try to educate people on the fact that these letters exist, are separate letters and have their own place in the alphabet. When we list Å under A we enforce a misconception. In addition it has been decided that the collation in categories are to be with these letters in their normal place at the end of the alphabet. Wikipedia should have all lists collated the same way. Variation will definately cause confusion. When categories automatically list Å last we should also do it here and in all other articles. This might be inconvenient for some people until they learn, but it will increase correct knowledge. Inge 20:25, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
- I see your point, but my point is that this is the English Wikipedia, and its readers - whatever language they prefer - will most likely use the Latin alphabet accordingly, even if that means that it would be wrong if translated to another language (interwiki). There are many specific rules for languages that use the same alphabet (e.g. IJ, AA, Ñ, CH) concerning proper collation, but an international "audience" can hardly be expected to learn all these rules and exceptions when looking up a word in an encyclopedia. After all, the names of the countries themselves (in this case) are translated into English (Norway, not Norge/Noreg etc).
- The idea about ordering the flags differently according to degree of sovereignty or political hierarchy (autonomy) sounds good. // Big Adamsky • BA's talk page 20:52, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
- Most people will use the search function when looking up a word, but I see your point too. I disagree with the importance given to it compared to other arguments. As a general problem this should be resolved somewhere other than this particular talk page. Because of the category thing I have a feeling this has already been done. In this particular page your "problem" isn't really that big because people looking for Åland will find it in approx. the same amount of time whether it is listed first or last in the section. I like the idea of ordering the flags according to degree of sovereingty (etc) first and then alphabetically. The flags were ordered similarily earlier I think. If wee agree to do that, it will improve the article and we have solved our alphabet dispute for now :)Inge 21:57, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah, I know. I posted this because I thought it would be good manners to explain my reverts, since it's the second time now. I'm not too familiar with how categories are sorted. I just have a passion for flags. :) The "problem" would certainly be many times greater if you are abroad trying to look up a person in a foreign phonebook and are unable to find that name because of illogical local collation conventions. // Big Adamsky • BA's talk page 22:13, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
- I am not as passionate about this particular question as the lenght of this debate might indicate:) Categories are automatically sorted with Æ,Ø,Å after Z. That makes it part of the programming and the reason I think this issue has been resolved by others. I think the issue of people looking for things on long lists could easily be fixed by listing on both places or by placing For "listings" beginning with Å see end of list. For our small list of flags the order of which they are placed really doesn't matter too much. It's "cosmetic". As the three of us seem to agree to place the Faroes and Åland last because they are dependent areas I assume it is OK for me to do so.?Inge 16:38, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
- I knooowwww, me too. And as already stated, the only reason why I started this thread was to explain the reasoning behind those two edits of mine. And since you guys replied I felt compelled to keep debating back and forth for a while. It is quite plausible that this matter has already been settled in the categories and that this example should be followed in lists and galleries by default. And as you said, this debacle has only minimal implications in this particular gallery article. (Btw, the UN lists Åland as if it began with a modified "A" or a "double-A" in its publications.) // Big Adamsky • BA's talk page 16:49, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
- PS: Speaking of ordering flags in alphabetic order, have you seen this edit?
- Yes I have seen it. It's good enough for me:). I feel done with this collation thing. Right now I am searching for some inspiration for new flag articles.Inge 17:07, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
- A good debate is never too long. :) As to sorting and categorisation, I don't think we can read policies out of the software itself. I believe the sorting made by the software is based on unicode entities, no explicit policy, and the placement of Å, Æ and Ø (in that order) is just nearly correct; more lucky than wise. (For some unexpected results see this sorting.) And there are lots of semi-wars going on between English speakers and other language speakers, especially over biographical articles, where some try to enforce English sorting of non-English letters, and others try to enforce the sorting of the respective languages. Anyway, most of the article sorting and list sorting that we do should be made explicit and not automatic. --Eddi (Talk) 02:03, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
Former flag of Schelswig-Holstein
Surely the flag listed is just the Danish flag because Schleswig-Holstein was once Danish-controlled. Are there any explanations to prove that suggestion wrong?
Schleswig-Holstein was technically an independent duchy in personal union with the Danish crown. That is, they had the same monarch, but S-H was not considered part of Denmark proper, but rather a possession of the Danish crown. The situation is similar to the period of the first three Georges of Great Britain, who were both Kings of Great Britain and Electors (later Kings) of Hanover. Hanover was not part of Great Britain; rather it was a separate possession of the reigning English monarch. Thus the flag of S-H, while identical to the Danish flag, was the flag of a separate state and deserves its own place. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 19:31, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
Unofficial flags of Sweden
The problem with these unofficial flags is that they are not used, not regognized, and -- in some instances -- were newly created by some random people. The Scanian flag I don't doubt, but the others would need a reference of actually being in use. This affects
Unofficial flag of Bohuslän.gif
Unofficial flag of Bohuslän
Unofficial flag of Götaland
Unofficial flag of Gotland
Unofficial flag of Norrland.gif
Unofficial flag of Vestsverige.gif
Unofficial flag of Western Sweden
Unofficial flag of Öland.gif
Unofficial flag of Öland
Unoffical flag flown by Saint Eric's Cathedral, Stockholm
- The "unofficial flag of Norrland" is often used up north (there is actually one right outside my window now!). It should be put back on the page a.s.a.p, I dont understand why it was taken away in the first place... /MJ
- I'd appreciate a link to a site, anything, saying that these flags are used in a wider extent. This includes all Swedish flags (except the Flag of Skåne which is an official flag)... I have already once removed a set of "unofficial flags" of which several did not appear to be widespread at all. So please, add a reference, or I will remove the flags. Remember Wikipedia:Verifiability: The obligation to provide a reliable source lies with the editors wishing to include the material, not on those seeking to remove it. -- Fred-Chess 14:15, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
We should decide on what policy to follow here. Some of these flags are more notable than others. Some are oficial and some are not. Being official is not a good criteria for whether a flag should be included or not. I am for a quite liberal policy, where a flag should be included even if it is interesting only from a vexillological or design point of view. I don't think all of the flags have to be included, but as we see above some flags are unknown to some and notable to others. For one example the flag of Northern Norway is in my mind less notable than the flag of Norrland as the flag of Norrland has at least received som coincidental attention. But I think it is interesting that the two are so similar and I want to know more. Thats good enough for me. But the more duboius flags should be clearly marked so we don't give them notoriety ourselves. I am going to reinsert all the Swedish flags for now. Any views? Inge 15:47, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
- Well, I am going to remove some of the flags again, until there is provided references of the flags being in use. If there are commonly used, it shouldn't be hard. And if there is no such written references, then they shouldn't be in the article -- Wikipedia is not the place to introduce new concepts.
- This goes for the flag of Norrland too. While the observations of MJ are most likely accurate, a written reference is still mandatory. / Fred-Chess 22:14, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
- I propose that we delete the flags of Western Norway and Northern Norway, as these seem to have been invented by a swedish flag book editor of dubious reputation, source. If possible, they should be deleted both from this article and the images deleted from Commons, or at least marked with a note underlining their questionable status. --Orland 15:15, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
These flags are highly questionable and were removed from the article page:
Unofficial flag of Nordnorge.gif
Unofficial flag of Northern Norway
Unofficial flag of Vestlandet.gif
Unofficial flag of Western Norway
Inge 18:30, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
I have removed the Unofficial "Teutonic-Celtic" flag because it appears to have been designed by a Wikipedian for use in Template:User Teutonic-celtic origin; see Image talk:Nordic-celtic flag.svg. I have also removed the unsubstantiated reference to Gaelic heritage, and since there is no Irish dimension I replaced "British Isles" with "Great Britain". jnestorius(talk) 22:39, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
- And now I've had to remove it again.--Pharos 00:20, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
- Interestingly, at least to me, the same basic design was used at on the Talk page of the Flag of Ireland article:
Unofficial and Fictional
What is the reasoning behind Unofficial and Fictional flags in this article? How is the Flag of the Highlands of Scotland not fictional? Or the Vinland flag? It is misleading for an encyclopedia to lump real and historical flags with these "unofficial" things. At the least, a reorganization is needed.
And an article titled Nordic Cross Flag and about flags bearing a Nordic cross could probably do without the Nordic flags without the Nordic cross section. It doesn't add anything, just adds confusion.
I removed the flag and the article, since I redirected the article about to group to the FIAV article. I removed the image, since it was under a non-commercial license, which has been disallowed since May of 2005. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 21:35, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
Flag of Verona
What is the story with the flag of Verona in Italy? It looks like the Swedish flag, so I guess it should be on this page too. I would hava added it, but I didn't find it in Wikipedia articles (and I don't know the exact dimensions and colour codes). Here's the coat of arms: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/13/Verona-Stemma.png 220.127.116.11 18:55, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
I have created an SVG version of this image at Image:Flag of Iceland - 1914 Proposal.svg, but neither the English nor Italian versions of this page appear to be able to thumbnail it correctly, though as you can see, it seems to be specific to this page, possibly because it uses gallery. I have left it unchanged. Could somebody more knowledgeable fix this on both wikis please? nandhp 11:53, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
Flag of Barra
Before people start removing the unofficial flag of Barra I would like to list a variety of sites that have dissussed the authenticity of this flag, and a number of sites that actually produce it for sale. The flag is indeed in use. The flag is discussed in the flags of the world website  Scott Hatton, on 6 October 2005 comments in a post on the Lewis flag discussion within the Western Isles community, "Barra and Lewis were generally deemed as authentic, South Uist slightly less so..." It should be noted that the flag of Barra is available from Mr Flag  and A A Flags .
JennieM 17:49, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
Flag of Pärnu
I believe the flag of Pärnu should be added under 'other nordic flags witht the nordic cross', due to it being the official flag of Pärnu, Estonia 
Vendelbrog shoud be there too!
Why has the Vendsyssel flag been "whitened"? It certainly has been in use. I saw it twice in the 1990'ies, once flying nearby a Vendsyssel farm. "Not commonly known" must refer to Danes living outside Vendsyssel. Cf. http://www.fotw.net/flags/dk-vend.html. Klauber Flag produces and sells this flag in all sizes on http://www.klauber-flag.dk/flag.asp?cmd=details&flag=1167.
I agree totally. I've seen the flag in use several places in Vendsyssel and also on sale in Aalborg. The text should be changed.
Cornwall, Saint Piran's Flag
NOTE: Large part of this article copied to Commons
I thought the style of this article would fit better on Commons, so I went ahead and copied the marjority of it to commons:Gallery of Nordic Cross flags. Now maybe the Wikipedia article could be restructured to look less like a gallery and more like an encylopedic article. --Himasaram 06:14, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
There is no substantial evidence supporting the claim of the German "1871-1892" flag
This supposed "1871-1892" German flag which was posted here is spreading across wikipedia's flags pages. Almost all evidence available claims that Germany's flag from 1871-1918 was the black-white-red tricolour. This Nordic cross German flag has been added on the basis of Original Research, which is forbidden to be used on wikipedia articles. I am removing the information that states that this was the flag, and changing it to being that this flag is "claimed to be" the German flag from 1871-1892.--R-41 20:42, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
Newfoundland, Greenland, and Sami
Where does the Newfoundland flag fit into all of this? Meaning the newer official flag, not the pink, white, and green. It looks quite a bit like the Nordic Cross, as its cross is a bit off-center.
Also there used to be a section called something like "Nordic flags without the Nordic Cross" but it's not there anymore. I could have sworn that, in some version not too long ago, it pointed out how the Greenland and Sami flags have an off-center circle instead of a cross. Squidfryerchef 04:13, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
More Norwegian flags
I have added several Norwegian flags for which I could not find images in Commons.
Fair use rationale for Image:Fbnfvv.png
Image:Fbnfvv.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
Is the Scanian flag unofficial?
Read Scania and you see that it states: '[The flag has been] used by Skåne Regional Council since 1999.' Wouldn't this mean that the flag actually is official? Or is the issue that the flag traditionally stands for the province of Scania, but is currently used officaly only by the county of Scania? Yenx (talk) 12:29, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
- I don't know what it takes to make it official but according to the Swedish article it's also registered in something called "Skandinavisk vapenrulla". It also says that it was officially adopted by the Scanian Regional Council in 1999. But maybe official in this article means that it has to be approved by the Swedish government? I think clarification is needed here. /Jiiimbooh (talk) 19:20, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
- The flag is offically adopted by Skåne Regional Council - but as far as I can tell, formally only as a flag for the Regional Council and its sphere of activities: public healthcare system, public transport and co-ordination of development of commerce, communication and culture. As a flag for the whole of the province, it is still unofficiall. /B****n (talk) 10:56, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
- Region Skåne, which is one of the 21 County Councils of Sweden, has decided to use the flag on some occasions, always together withe the national flag and the region's own heraldic banner. But it is not on their web site —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vedum (talk • contribs) 20:00, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
- (It was a mistake, the comment was not finished). In most cases they use a logotype.  --Vedum (talk) 20:09, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
Image copyright problem with Image:Malady Front.gif
The image Image:Malady Front.gif is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check
- That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
- That this article is linked to from the image description page.
Nordic cross or similar design?
Should Brazilian towns have there own section? Are they Nordic crosses or just offset crosses? Don't we want to limit these, or are we going to index all offset crosses in the world. For the non Nordic-related crosses, a few examples would suffice... Hrcolyer (talk) 14:25, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
- Such a section has been made at some point, the BR flags were left out in their own section. I've moved them under "random nordic cross-like flags" since that seems to be what they are. All of the other sections (German, British, Ethnic, Baltic) have some text and claim to actually being Nordic crosses rather than simply a visually identical design element. --Belg4mit (talk) 20:47, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
- I don't see any explanation, here or in the Míkmaq article, as to that flag's connection to the Nordic cross. It seems to me that the historical derivation and intent are key; the concept here is ethnic or historical connection, not coincidental similarity of graphic design. Unless there's some information of substance, let the "random nordic cross-like flags" be removed. Spark240 (talk) 15:18, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
Shouldn't some reorganisation be done. In particular, the following should be moved, no? Flag of the Danish monarch, flown in his capacity as Duke of Holstein until 1863 and Schleswig until 1864. => Should be note next to Danish flag Unofficial flag of Swedish-speaking Finns => under Finland Unofficial flag of the Scanian lands (southern Sweden) => under Sweden Unofficial flag of Småland (no actual use recorded) => under Sweden Unofficial flag of Götaland, or alternatively Östergötland => under Sweden Unofficial flag of West Sweden => under Sweden
It would be more interesting to separate the actual Nordic flights from the 'coincidental' similarities. For example, among others, the Norman flag, and Wilmington one should be with the Nordic flags, rather than stuck between Brazilian cities and Tbilissi (which are curiosities, using the graphical effect of the Nordic cross, although this is not a Nordic cross). In particular Normandy and others such as Baltic, German and UK sections should be nearer the top as they are a direct heritage of Nordic/Viking pasts...
Flag of FC St. Pauli (football team)
As you can see for example here http://www.footballmatch.de/Stadien/stpauli1.jpg the football/soccer team of St. Pauli (Hamburg) has a flag in the style of the nordic cross. Don't know if this should or could be mentioned, but I think it's more often in use than some flags which rather seem made by single vexillologists promoting their flags.
The flag of St. Pauli is not official, though. I've also seen versions with the proportions of the Dannebrog (smaller white lines) as well as one in the style of Iceland's flag, but showing a brown ground with a red cross with white outlines.
Brown and white are the team's colours, but it's team logo features also red due the flag of Hamburg.
Are there any notable complaints anywhere about these European nations using the Cross in their flags? I would think if some people get upset over a generic "In God We Trust," they would definitely get upset over an overtly Christian symbol on the national flags. Is that the case? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Masternachos (talk • contribs) 21:50, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
- Not that I have heard. The Nordic countries too secular to be bothered by crosses or somebody saying something about trusting god, in general. All I managed to find was SIDA, the goverment organ responsible for organising Swedish aid to developing countries using the Three Crowns instead of the flag in Afghanistan. . Not much, really... Dendlai (talk) 01:05, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
- So, they are so secular they've moved beyond being upset over religious symbolism that doesn't affect them directly? Is that it? Sounds like they're more "mature(?)" about these things than some in this country (US).Masternachos (talk) 16:15, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
- Then again, the US was kind of founded on the ideas of Freedom and whatnot, while the Nordic countries were just... founded.Masternachos (talk) 17:09, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
- Didn't mean to imply atheists and what-not are immature, you know?18.104.22.168 (talk)
- Speaking for myself, as an Atheist Swede, I wouldn't want the cross from the Swedish flag removed. I think the cross represents a large part of our history. After all we've been Christians since the 1100s and Christianity is still officially the largest religion. I actually have the Scanian cross flag on my wall.
- Having said that, I did see an article about art students making proposals for a new Swedish flag to show that Sweden has become less religious and more multi-cultural, but I interpreted that more as an art project than a serious proposal for a new flag. Jiiimbooh (talk) 13:50, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
Can we remove these? Or at least, the non-notable ones? It seems the great majority are just original creations of editors and appear no where else, except on Wikipedia. Hayden120 (talk) 11:35, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
- I think some of them ought to be removed as well.--Brianann MacAmhlaidh (talk) 07:07, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
"Cross flag" redirect
royal but not that royal
- Royal standard of Sweden with the lesser coat of arms (the royal house using the greater coat of arms)
The recently added information that a Scandinavian cross flag is basically a gonfalon is tagged as needing citation. A citation to confirm that statement would be hard to find. It is commonly assumed that the first documented use of Dannebrog, the oldest Scandinavian cross flag, is to be seen in the great union seal of king Eric of Pomerania. It is depicted as a regular flag flown from a vertical pole held by the three lions of the Danish arms. The gonfalon information seems to deserve deletion. Roede (talk) 15:28, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
Unofficial Flags (Scotland)
On this basis I have reinstated them. Although unofficial, they certainly exist, are available to purchase and evidence of their actual use is well documented in photographs easily found online. Endrick Shellycoat 14:22, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
- Reread FOTW - it's a collection of emails. Read their entry for the Lewis flag, Wikipedia had a part to play in the advertisement of that flag. I could email the website with a fake-name and tell them of a flag (of my own creation), and I could fly it myself and upload a photo of it on Flickr. So what? It doesn't matter if the flags are sold on the net. Anything can be sold on the net. There's a whole internet industry in dubious coats of arms and other 'clan knick-knacks'. There are companies selling Wikipedia articles as books. It doesn't legitimise anything. We're suppose to follow reliable sources, you know that. They should be noted in a good book on flags, or mentioned in a good book on Barra and South Uist. Not flickr, or emails, or crappy online-stores that sell anything under the sun. Who wants to bet these types of online-stores use Wikipedia as a source? All they need to do is grab the svg. That's why editors should be on the lookout for this kind of thing, and should be suspicious of the "unofficial" flags on the list. The mrflag link you gave lists flags of micronations, and has a nice collection of 'novelty flags' too. Wikipedia is not a directory of everything that exists or has existed - but that's what this list is turning into.--Brianann MacAmhlaidh (talk) 06:30, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
- I hear what you say, however the article clearly states that these are unofficial flags, as it does with numerous others whose inclusion is equally if not more questionable on the basis of your argument.
- Personally, I'd prefer only official flags to appear on the article. However, previous editors have elected to include proposed and unofficial designs whose legitimacy could also be challenged. What I object to is a scattergun approach to determining what does and does not stay, which to be honest seemed to be the approach you took with regard to those flags which you elected to remove. I'm certain that according to your criteria numerous other examples of unofficial and proposed versions could likewise have been removed, but for whatever reason you selected just those three.
Svalbard Unnoficial Flags
How about adding some of them?
http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20080605002133/uncyclopedia/images/8/80/Flag_of_Svalbard.PNG - This one is actually VERY popular, at least on the internet. But I have no idea who created it, you can find some entries with it on google images.
http://www.penguinpride.com/i08/svalbard1.jpg - Recently I have found this one, reminds me of proposed Estonian flag... I prefer the first black flag (because is unique), but at least for this one you can find a source: http://www.penguinpride.com/2009/05/13/flag-of-svalbard/
There is also something like this: http://images.wikia.com/cybernations/images/1/1c/Flag_of_the_Union_of_Svalbard.svg , used by some cyber-nation/microstate (?) http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Union_of_Svalbard , but map flags are just absolutely disgusting and recognised as a blasphemous heresy in the vexicology (that's why I support Serbian rights to Kosovo province and North Cyprus right to secession).
Some another propositiom http://www.crwflags.com/fotw/images/s/sj-prop.gif (source: http://www.crwflags.com/fotw/flags/sj-arms.html ) but I don't like it to be honest, too Luxembourg-looking. You can find similar pattern used in the previous entry.
Oficially Svalbard uses flag and coat of arms of Norway (which is quite... strange), that's why all these flags are just proposed.
- Svalbard is a part of Norway. All Norwegian Subdivisions use the Norwegian flag. All flags claiming to be unofficial flags of Svalbard are pure internet fantasies and have no connection to the real life place of Svalbard. Fantasy flags should not be included here and wikipedia should not contribute to their proliferation as it only serves to confuse those who look to this web page for facts. Some flag proposals who are documentet to have been real contenders when a country adopted a new national flag could be concidered, but not the thousands of internet fantasies out there.Inge (talk) 12:46, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
Church of Sweden
Obviously, the cross dates to the Crusades, but the Nordic cross is defined as the cross with its center shifted hoistward. The question of when this originated pretty much boils down to the question when the flags became rectangular. It appears to be quite clear that the Nordic cross is a "rectangularised" version of the triple-tailed flag, which itself seems to date to the 1660s or so. But a triple tailed flag, where the central tail prolongs the horizontal arm of the cross, doesn't really amount to a "Nordic cross": the "Nordic cross" emerges as soon as you turn a triple-tailed flag into a rectangular one.
A rectangular flag was introduced for as Danish civil ensign in 1748, and for the Sweden-Norway union in 1818. So I suppose we must conclude, pending further evidence, that the first Nordic cross is that of the Danish civil ensign introduced 1748, and that Sweden-Norway following suit in a complicated history of revisions in the 19th century, leading to the modern Scandinavian flags by the early 20th century. --dab (𒁳) 12:46, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
United Kingdom: Unofficial Flag of Northern England
Isn't that missing?
Here (from Google): http://www.crwflags.com/fotw/images/g/gb-e-neng.gif
I'm sure I saw this flag here on Wikipedia some years ago...
just found a pretty obvious nordic cross in puerto rico
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayam%C3%B3n,_Puerto_Rico#/media/File:Flag_of_Bayamon.svg — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:702:8000:F230:45C:6D6C:3D27:E93B (talk) 23:48, 26 May 2016 (UTC)