Jump to content

Talk:Union Jack/Archive 4

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5

HAWAIIAN FLAG

The portion mentioning the Union Jack within the Hawaiian flag is poorly done. But I'd rather open up a discussion about it rather than attempt to edit it and it deserves its own portion, although a link to the wiki page on the Hawaiian Flag may or may not have sufficed.

According to the Jan. 1, 1862 edition of Ka Nupepa Kuokoa: The Hawaiian Flag was designed for King Kamehameha I, in the year 1816. As the King desired to send a vessel to China, to sell a cargo of sandal-wood, he in company with John Young, Isaac Davis and Capt. Alexander Adams, (the latter now living at Kalihi, near Honolulu, and aged about eighty years,) Made this flag for the ship, which was a war vessel, called the Forrester, carrying 16 guns, and was owned by Kamehameha I.

The 1880 Hawaiian Almanac (Thomas G. Thrum) on page 24 also goes into detail about how the flag eventually came to be. Mamoahina (talk) 20:48, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

I think you should go ahead and make the edits. I don't agree with that (talk) 18:41, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Scottish Union Flag (The Reliquary ref)

I have removed the following: This flag's blazon is described elsewhere as "Azure, a Cross gules, fimbriated, argent; over all a Saltier of the last", or alternatively as "On a blue shield (field?) of Scotland the red cross of St. George fimbriated with its white field, surmounted by the white cross of St. Andrew"

The reasons for deletion are as follows:

i. A verbal blazon is seen as an authoritative and authorised formal description of a coat of arms, flag badge etc. This flag wan not official and therefore deserves no blazon;

ii) The author (Llewellyn_Jewitt) who formulated this blazon was not a herald or connected in any way with the college of arms or authorised to produce this blazon;

iii) The article written by Jewitt only gives the blazon as a footnote and does not appear in the body of the text;

iv) A question has already been raised over the use of 'shield vs field' in the authors footnote. I add another question: the use of 'over all' in the blazon is incorrect; it should be surmounted. Surmounted is when one charge is place over another charge, over all is when one charge is placed over multiple charges. Note, the blazon of the official union flag uses the term surmounted;

v) The author Jewitt was both contributor and editor of The Reliquary. Therefore this is ineffect a self-published source;

vi) This blazon cannot corroborated be found in any other heraldic or flag source;

vii) No other heraldic or flag book attempts to give a blazon for this flag; I don't agree with that (talk) 16:25, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Moving forward

I have add a specification diagram for the Union Jack and reworked that section (now headed Design) to bring it more it line with other national flag articles (such as Flag of the United States and Flag of France. I've also moved it towards the beginning of the article. I think the Other Ratios section could also be merged into this new section.

Two other sections worth considering are: Symbolism and Display and Use. We have some of this information in the article but it would be worth bring it all together under these headings.

It would be good if we could move this article to GA status. I don't agree with that (talk) 18:37, 17 August 2010 (UTC)


In Design this: "The Union Flag is normally twice as long as it is wide, a ratio of 1:2. In the United Kingdom land flags are normally a ratio of 3:5; the Union flag can also be made in this shape, but is 1:2 for most purposes." In Design -> Flying this: "The normal proportions of the flag are 1:2, except in the British Armed Forces, where a 3:5 version may be used." This Yank is confused.--Trappist the monk (talk) 01:00, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

EU Flag

Why is the European Union flag linked in the see also? It does not appear to have been influenced by the Union Jack, so what important relation does with the Union Flag?Jamhaw (talk) 02:23, 13 December 2010 (UTC)jamhaw

Newly-invented flags

We need to make sure that any flags illustrating new proposals really appear in reliable references supplied with relevant content when the flag is added to the article (and preferably appearing on the commons page as well since they may also be used on other-language wikis). After I reverted a recent addition with no accompanying text and no reference, I checked the other two images in that section. As a result I removed an implausible redlink from the commons page of one and came to the conclusion that both images are original creations of the commons authors and thus original research here. Thus I have removed them. I would have no objection to their reappearance provided they are accompanied by updated article text and reliable references. --Mirokado (talk) 23:46, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

You really just want things your way. Since the idea was presented as to Possible new flags, There is nothing wrong with the introduction of these items here. the design elements were clearly explained and the reasons given. You failure to understand the reasoning is not good enough to have them remove based upon you one POV. You reason to remove them is less valid than my reason supported with the article to place it in there. Keep in mind that as you cal it original research can still be valid. But I would conclude that a creative design is subject to the creator of the work and the person that would view it. I think the basis of the flag elements are clear and stand on their own merits and answer the questions posed in the article. Keep in mind at one point, all creations are original. It is not until they are created do they enter into the discussion. I feel your censorship is undercutting the very purpose that the Jack was made for. To promote a dialog and offer options. If you have a valid point to make, state it in the article as that would allow others to see and participate in the discourse. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Petphotog (talk • contribs) 07:19, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
Please read Wikipedia:No original research, Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources. The article talk page (here in this case) is the correct place for discussions about article content. (adjusted threading) --Mirokado (talk) 00:50, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Union Jack

Wouldn't WP:COMMONNAME suggest that this article be called "Union Jack" instead of "Union Flag", as "Union Jack" is generally more used than "Union Flag"? I see this has already been discussed several times (not recently), but could someone explain why the article uses the 'official' name instead of the common name (and yes I know vexillologically speaking a jack is different to a flag). Thanks. IgnorantArmies 11:04, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Dubious

This:

The three component crosses that make up the Union Flag are sized as follows:
  • St. George's Cross is 1/5 of the flag's width wide and a 1/15 flag width fimbriation
  • St. Andrew's Cross is 1/5 of the flag's width wide and the broader white diagonal is 1/10 width wide
  • St. Patrick's Cross is 1/15 of the flag's width wide and the narrow white diagonal is 1/30 width wide

appears to be based on a misconception; the same one that describes the counterchange as "the slight pinwheeling of St Patrick's cross".

It is possible to produce the design by starting with a wide white saltire and laying a much narrower, pinwheel-skew, red saltire over part of it. But I don't think that's an appropriate analysis for the intended symbolism. IMO St. Andrew's Cross and St. Patrick's Cross are both 2/15 of the flag's width wide, and counterchanged to prevent one overlaying and obscuring the other.

The difficulty is that the whole countercharged device has a white 1/30 border, which can really only be called a fimbriation on the St. Patrick's Cross side; on the St Andrew's Cross side I don't know what one should call it. It certainly makes the St. Andrew's Cross look wider, but is it part of the cross or a separate identically-coloured area? Bernard Burke complained about the slight to Ireland's honour of having the Andrew's cross look bigger, and the regimental colours of 1900 were in part a response to this. jnestorius(talk) 15:52, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Same old story

I am sure this has been discussed in the archives, but it would help to go over it again. The term Union Jack is not incorrect despite this edit summary, as a cursory read of Union Flag#Terminology will show. The only incorrect thing is the repeated attempt to include the urban myth that the flag is only known as the Union Jack when flown on a ship, and that the use of Union Jack at any other time is incorrect. O Fenian (talk) 22:50, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

The flag is known by many as the Union Jack, but that name is, strictly speaking, and I emphasise strictly speaking incorrect. The correct, proper name for the falg is the Union Flag, and if Union Flag#Terminology says otherwise then it too is incorrect. Jacks in genereal are flags used at sea. WizOfOz (talk) 22:59, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
I can only assume you have not even read the section you are referring to, since it says nothing of the sort. O Fenian (talk) 23:01, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
Did I say I had read it? No. I merely stated that if that's what it says, it's wrong. I haven't read it, but you clearly have, so enlighten us. WizOfOz (talk) 23:04, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
How do you know what it says if you have not read it? I guess when you did not read it you also did not read the sentences that say Union Jack is not wrong, including one from the Admiralty themselves? That the flag is known at the Union Jack when on a ship does not make the general name Union Jack wrong, that is a nonsensical conclusion. O Fenian (talk) 23:09, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
Struth! Do you not read what people write? I hadn't read it, at least not for about 12 months (actually I've now glanced at it again). I didn't know, or didn't recall, what it said. All I said above was that if it said what you claimed it said, then it too was wrong, so enough said and stop trying to be obtuse. I'll look at the text in detail a little later and comment on it. WizOfOz (talk) 23:13, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
There you go again indirectly repeating the urban myth that the flag is only known as the Union Jack at sea. Spot the difference between the following two sentences:
  1. The flag is called the Union Jack when on a ship
  2. The flag is only called the Union Jack when on a ship
See what difference one little word can make? The first one is true, but the second one is not. The reliable sources make that clear. O Fenian (talk) 23:18, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
I'm not disagreeing with you on the semantics of the above, but again, try reading carefully what I said. Pay particular attention to the words "strictly speaking". WizOfOz (talk) 23:27, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
I think I get it - by adding the words "strictly speaking", you've invalidated the historical uses of 'jack' on land, because logic always beats reality. The article should therefore be rewritten to exclude any mention of 'jacks' unless they are at sea. --taras (talk) 02:03, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
This argument has been done to death. The are plenty of sound sources identifying that the Union Jack is a perfectly credible name for the flag wherever it may fly. On a personal note, I find this urban myth - thrown about by pseudo-pedants everywhere, or so it seems - one of the most annoying.--Breadandcheese (talk) 13:19, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Why is the Ikurriña flag included?

In the section "Use in other flags", the Ikurriña flag is included. Why is that? The flag might look similar to the Union Flag, since it has a cross and a saltire on it. But the Ikurriña flag is not a British Union Flag. It's a Basque flag. On the Ikurriña page you can read the following, which makes no indication that the Ikurriña flag has anything to do with the British Union Flag.

"The red ground symbolizes the Biscayan people (the race); the green saltire might represent the Oak of Guernica, a symbol of the old laws of Biscay, or Fueros; and over them, the white cross, God's symbol of Basque Catholic devotion." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.253.84.194 (talk) 07:44, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

File:Royal Observer Corps Ensign.PNG Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Royal Observer Corps Ensign.PNG, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests August 2011
What should I do?
A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 00:06, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

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)

Merge Flag of the United Kingdom into Union Jack

What are peoples thoughts please? I can't see why they are separate. Thanks --JetBlast (talk) 10:50, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

I would support a merger provided the article properly reflects the fact the flag started in 1606, before it became the flag of the newly formed Kingdom in 1707 and the modified/latest version in 1801. BritishWatcher (talk) 11:11, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Oppose As this is both a national flag and a design used in many others there's an awful lot of information that's best kept separate. Plus the Union Jack is not the sole flag of the UK - the ensigns are also UK flags and are no more the Union Jack than the numerous other flags with the design in the canton. Timrollpickering (talk) 13:11, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

The problem with a merger is that the flag retains official status in Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. The question should instead be how much of the content in this article should be siphoned away to the other article? --Jiang (talk) 14:14, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Why not Union Jack?

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Hi, I am just wondering why this article isn't called Union Jack as per Wikipedia:COMMONNAME? Thanks --JetBlast (talk) 21:00, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

  • There is a heated debate going on as you might see below. About 20 years ago someone disinterred an old name for the national flag of the United Kingdom: 'Union Flag'. They then started an urban myth that the name 'Union Jack' should only be used when the flag was flown from a jack-staff at sea. This interesting and entirely incorrect fairy-tale took hold amongst pedants who started trotting it out at every opportunity and it has, over the intervening years, gained credibility in many parts of our national life: importantly the BBC who seem to always use Union Flag in their broadcasts to the almost entire exclusion of the name Union Jack. Why this is I have no idea (the BBC aren't commenting: I have written to them without success) but I have a strong suspicion that the 'powers that be' in the government would like the nation to adopt the Union Flag as the name for our nation’s flag as it is non-denominational. In a politically correct nation where we have Muslims, Hindus etc. a flag that (may) have a Christian name ('Jack derived from 'Jacob') is to be buried in favour of the vacuous and empty-meaning 'Union Flag'. However the origins of the name 'Union Jack' are lost in time and there are several possible sources, and so the idea that it should be cast into oblivion is based on flawed knowledge and an urban myth about the jack-staff. The Flag Institute website pages say "It is often stated that the Union Flag should only be described as the Union Jack when flown in the bows of a warship, but this is a relatively recent idea." Platinumpaintitblack (talk) 08:40, 27 August 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Platinumpaintitblack (talk • contribs) 07:07, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
The view that "Union Flag" is 'technically' correct and that "Union Jack" should be used only in a nautical context, is a lot older than 20 years ago. It is more like 40 years ago, at least.Eregli bob (talk) 10:49, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

I am the same person who started the heated debate. :) --JetBlast (talk) 14:24, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

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)

It seems to me that §Flying adequately states which end of the flag is the hoist end. The two adjacent images show both the correct and incorrect way to fly the flag and the captions clearly state, for the purposes of the illustrations, that the hoist is on the left.
What §Flying doesn't say is how the flag is to be displayed when, for example, it is mounted on a flat surface (a wall). The rules for the American flag when displayed on a wall has the canton at the flag's own right (the viewer's left). If there is a similar rule for the Union Flag, that would explain the sentence that you describe. In which case, a little bit of clarification is in order.
—Trappist the monk (talk) 19:44, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
It's simple - although we don't usually display the flag on walls. The Hoist goes to the left - the same as it does when the flag is flown the right-way-up. If it's flown the other way round then it's also upside-down. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.7.147.13 (talk) 20:48, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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 (talk • contribs) 19:43, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Another reason for this is that otherwise, a distress signal would be harder to make, and so anyone who has been taught which way up it should go would be able to tell whether a distress signal is being called. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CaptainOAP (talk • contribs) 22:37, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Spelling

'Fimbriate' misspelled as 'fimbrate.' Amended. Stephen A (talk) 02:39, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

British embassy flag

Is there a special name for the Union Jack flown at British Embassies abroad? It has the Royal coat of arms of the United Kingdom in a white circle in the centre. It doesn't seem to be mentioned in the article. Alansplodge (talk) 15:28, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

It doesn't seem to have a special name, but it's detailed at List of British flags#Diplomatic flags. Perhaps a section under Use in other flags dealing with the diplomatic flags as well as the similar governor's flags would be worthwhile? Andrew Gray (talk) 16:41, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. The comments in support are significantly stronger, in terms of Wikipedia policy, than those in oppose. Comments about merging were ignored as outside the scope of RM, but there's no prejudice against starting merge discussion. Jenks24 (talk) 10:18, 29 August 2012 (UTC)


Union Flag → Union Jack – As per WP:COMMONNAME - The Union flag is commonly known as the Union Jack [1] [2]. [3] [4] [5] [6] This is indicated in the opening sentence of the article and the 2 sources i provided above. JetBlast (talk) 18:58, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

The UKINUSA source you link does say its commonly known as Union Jack, but it is described as the Union Flag on several occasions in that article demonstrating it is "commonly used" too. BritishWatcher (talk) 19:11, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Strong support per WP:COMMONNAME. The flag is commonly referred to as the Union Jack. 2 lines of K303 19:35, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Support, per WP:COMMONNAME. Perhaps "Union Flag" would be preferred by specialists, but it is not understood at all by Americans or Canadians (I don't know about Australians, etc). Indeed, to Americans, "Union Flag" would refer to a flag flown by Union forces during a battle in the American Civil War. The term "Union Jack" is unambiguous, it refers only to the flag, and is the overwhelmingly familiar term for very populous English-speaking communities outside of Britain. And the original proposer above (JetBlast) even comments above that it is far more used in Britain itself. — P.T. Aufrette (talk) 00:12, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
...not understood at all by Americans or Canadians... and to Americans, "Union Flag" would refer to a flag flown by Union forces during a battle in the American Civil War. Utter and complete hogwash. Perhaps you are confusing the Confederate flag with the Flag of the United States which was the flag of the Union.
—Trappist the monk (talk) 17:39, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
Obviously the "Union flag" (usually with a lowercase f) was the flag of the pro-Union (anti-Confederate) forces. See this Google ngrams graph, specifically for American English, which shows a pronounced spike during the Civil War years from 1861 to 1865. — P.T. Aufrette (talk) 23:36, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
  • What is wrong with the source i posted above? "The flag of the United Kingdom, commonly known as the Union Jack" This is from a British Government website --JetBlast (talk) 08:09, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
  • We want sources saying it's more commonly known as the Union Jack. I know it's commonly known as the Jack, but not convinced the usage is any more common that Union Flag. I'm at work at the moment, but a Google Books search would be a good place to start. — Jon C.ॐ 08:19, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Strong oppose – current title hits the correct balance between being common and not wrong. DBD 08:11, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
    Please cite evidence that "Union Jack" is "wrong". — P.T. Aufrette (talk) 23:48, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Support per the sources provided, the term 'jack' is more common. The issue of it being 'wrong' can be explained in the text. Hot Stop 14:46, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Support From the text of the article, "The term 'Union Flag' is less well-known outside the United Kingdom,[11] and may refer to other union flags." It would seem that the current and proposed names are about equally valid for British readers, but the proposed one will be the most concise to the most readers. Make the move. --BDD (talk) 16:27, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
The text from the article that you quote is not supported by the adjacent citation ("Australian National Flag" (pdf).). Nowhere in that reference is it stated that The term 'Union Flag' is less well-known outside the United Kingdom.... I suspect that that sentence should be struck from the article.
—Trappist the monk (talk) 17:39, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Many people who don't know what they're talking about do refer to it as the Union Jack. However, those of us who do (and there are a lot of us) call it by its correct name. Yes, more people probably use Union Jack, but a very large minority do say Union Flag. Given that's the case, I think it's better to keep it under its correct name. -- Necrothesp (talk) 16:50, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
  • As one of those people who don't know what they are talking about, I'm not going to cast a vote. But I do think technically correct terms should be used when there are two close terminologies and we can elevate knowledge by titling it the technically correct terms. I found Necrothesp's point convincing. SLawsonIII (talk) 21:27, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Rename per WP:COMMONNAME. There's debate over whether "calling it the Union Jack on land is wrong" is accurate so we shouldn't be preserving a less familiar article title on such a contested basis. Timrollpickering (talk) 17:25, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Support per WP:COMMONNAME. It's not scientific but this [7] suggests that Union Jack is the more common word. I think it can only understate the popularity as 'Union Flag' has other uses such as American Civil War, while I don't think 'Union Jack' has other uses.--Flexdream (talk) 16:53, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Oppose—If it ain't broke, don't fix it. In all of the proposer's cited examples, the term Union Flag seems to be used just as much as the term Union Jack; thus far, (with the possible exception of Editor Flexdream's contribution to this topic), nothing suggests that Union Jack is far and away the most common. In the Wikipedia search box, Union Flag as a suggested topic appears before Union Jack.—Trappist the monk (talk) 17:39, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
    See the Google ngrams links directly below. — P.T. Aufrette (talk) 23:53, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
    I guess you didn't read my entire post so you must have missed the bit where I acknowledged "Editor Flexdream's contribution to this topic." Regardless, both names are concidered correct so I stand by my position that if it ain't broke, don't fix it. This dispute of which is more correct will ultimately get us nowhere.
—Trappist the monk (talk) 13:22, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Support. The predominance of "Union Jack" over "Union Flag" is overwhelming. Look at this ngram (similar to Flexdream's, but with lowercase versions added) to see just how much more often "Union Jack" is used - and that's without taking into account other uses for "Union Flag". Dohn joe (talk) 20:27, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
    Yes, this is pretty convincing. The predominance is still present when the ngrams graph is narrowed to either American English or British English — P.T. Aufrette (talk) 23:36, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Strong oppose. Both "Union Flag" and "Union Jack" are common names (note that policy merely points to using common names, not most common names). Between common names we prefer "Union Flag" because "Union Jack" is plainly inaccurate.--Jiang (talk) 03:56, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Support. "Union Jack" is the name that is used far more commonly as per evidence above. I also don't understand Jiang's comment above - are you claiming that "Union Jack" actually refers to a different flag? That's the only way the name could be "inaccurate." Given that both terms are as accurate, use the well-known one. (As a side note, another acceptable option would be to merge this article with Flag of the United Kingdom of course.) SnowFire (talk) 04:31, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
    Just as a little comment on that, I think that one thing that is making this debate messy (er, so wholly unlike so many other move debates, then!) is that we are in effect discussing too many things at once. It's clear that some editors don't agree with the current article itself where it says that both names are correct, whereas others agree that both are correct and just want to debate which "correct" name to use. If you are of the school of thought which says that Union Jack is simply wrong and Union Flag is the only correct name then clearly you're never going to want the move, because you are not comparing two otherwise equal things. I'm not saying I know the answer to this! If I did I would retire and write books about it and become very wealthy. It's just that I feel it's making it even harder than usual when some people are going "as any fule kno" for one heartfelt, sincerely held reason and others likewise but for the opposite reason. I think I will shut up and get a coffee now but it has been jolly nice talking to you. Best wishes DBaK (talk) 07:39, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Holy moley! SnowFire made me go off and read Flag of the United Kingdom, thanks for that. Erm. Are we sure that the purposes of these two articles are clear, and separate? I hope you are, and can explain it to me (think: elderly, confused. no polysyllabic words and you will do fine) because I aren't. It does add an interesting layer to the debate. And now I need hazelnut stuff in my coffee too - do you see what you are doing to me? Best wishes to all DBaK (talk) 07:46, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Oppose or merge article into Flag of the United Kingdom --Barryob (Contribs) (Talk) 13:41, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Support per WP:COMMONNAME. 88.81.100.235 (talk) 20:11, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Comment—I wonder if what we need is something that might look like this:
{{#ifeq: {{Rand|2|{{#time:U}}}} | 0 | {{DISPLAYTITLE:Union Flag}} | {{DISPLAYTITLE:Union Jack}} }}
which, if it worked (it doesn't), would randomly display either Union Flag or Union Jack as the article title. {{rand}} generates a pseudo-random number 0 or 1; the #ifeq compares the random number to 0; if the random number is zero, then the displayed title would be Union Flag; if not, the displayed title would be Union Jack.
—Trappist the monk (talk) 14:30, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Strong Support per WP:COMMONNAME; the new title would be more precise as well as less ambiguous. Outside of the UK, the term "Union Flag" is far more ambiguous, and could refer to a number of things. The aforementioned American Civil War is one example; another, related one, is the above note about the Grand Union Flag. (Note: The blue field of stars on the modern US flag is in context known as the "union"; another potential source of confusion.) My point is, while some people might recognize the term "Union Flag", everyone will recognize the term "Union Jack".
    (Actually, the only possible confusion I can think of is with the term Naval Jack, but I can't see the average reader mixing the two up.) Cheers, Zaldax (talk) 18:23, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Oppose Clearly both names are in common use. I think a good reason for preferring Union Flag as the title of the article is that this is the term suited to the more formal language of a written encyclopedia, rather than Union Jack which is probably rather more common in less formal spoken language ("the vernacular"). I'm not saying that one is right and the other wrong, or that one is better than the other, simply that UF is more appropriate in writing. Thus it is the Union Flag, but is often called the Union Jack.
    Whichever title we end up with, our article should reflect this distinction by using UF in the body and saying something like "also commonly referred to as the Union Jack" early on. This is what the British Embassy in Washington[8] and the British Monarchy[9] do. In fact both those references refer to Union Jack in the title, but our redirects mean that we already have both the article title fitting more formal written usage and the immediate accessibility of the vernacular as a redirect. The embassy's title has "the Union Jack flag" which is not a common usage at all and illustrates the compromise made for searchability.
    The Chicago Tribune (or perhaps Reuters) seem also to make the written/vernacular distinction when captioning a recent picture.[10] --Mirokado (talk) 14:18, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
Do you have any sources that says union flag is common or more common than Union Jack? --JetBlast (talk) 15:15, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi. Short answer is "no, but": the refs above refer to the flag as the Union Flag and find it necessary to explain that it is also "commonly known as" the Union Jack, so that rather supports my "clearly" in the first sentence. I'll also point out that "commonly" is used in a rather different sense, related to "often", from a statistical assertion that something is or is not "common" or "more common than". --Mirokado (talk) 16:15, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
I cant really see how you have a case if you have no sources to say that it is commonly known as the union flag. They all say its commonly named the Union Jack. As a Brit i have never ever head anyone call it the union flag, always the Jack. --JetBlast (talk) 17:55, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Strong SupportThe Union Jack has been the common name for around 300 years, and is overwhelmingly used by the populace of the UK and is the name other nationalities know it by. "Union Jack" is correct as the Flag Institute web site shows, in that The Admiralty uses (and has done for hundreds of years) the name Union Jack in all and any situations, and the term is totally legal as sanctioned by the UK government over 100 years ago. Therefore "Union Jack" is 100% legal and correct and is the most common name. "Union Flag" is a correct term also but is not in common use. There is an apocryphal tale in circulation that "Union Jack" is a name that should only be used when the flag is flown from a jack-staff at sea, but The Flag Institute website confirms that this is a 'relatively recent' idea. This urban myth has however taken hold in many quarters including the BBC and many government institutions. These official bodies may prefer the alternative name because it is non-denominational. In other words it is a non-Christian name. The very name 'Jack' as in jack-staff comes from Jacob (as in 'Jacobs ladder') and the jack-staff is named thus as it points to Heaven. Therefore even if it were true that the 'Jack' part comes from jack-staff (which is not certain anyway as there are several explanations possible) then those who prefer a secular name might be propagating the urban myth and supporting the Union Flag version as they wish to eradicate the Union Jack name entirely from our vocabulary. If it is only called Union Jack when flown at sea from the jack staff of a ship then that is not very often at all! The conspiracy to dump the name Union Jack and the continued pushing of the modern myth that supports this should be resisted by all those who really wish to preserve our culture and keep our traditions. The name "Union Jack" is perfectly legal, accurate and is the commonly used name. Therefore Wiki should update this and rename and reposition the article!Platinumpaintitblack (talk) 19:20, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
Every single one of the "sources" that you cited in your opening post use Union Flag, often more than once.
This topic is rather pointless. One term is as good as another. (no it isn't; yes it is; no it isn't! ...) I move to close discussion without action.
—Trappist the monk (talk) 13:30, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
But that doesn't indicate it is a common name, it indicates its an official name. So they do not support your claims. Other Google sources from other users show that union jack is used allot more than union flag. Due to the topic being so split and still on going this discussion should be allowed to run its course. --JetBlast (talk) 14:59, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
The sources that you posted certainly made common use of Union Flag just as they did of Union Jack. That seems to support my point that one term is as good as another; it seems to support Editor Necrothesp's claim that Union Flag is in "very common Use." That commonality is why this proposition is pointless. I do not withdraw my motion.
—Trappist the monk (talk) 00:10, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Oppose Union Flag is the correct term, Union Jack is only technically correct when the Union Flag is flown as a jack in a ship. Whilst the term Union Jack is frequently used it's simple to redirect the incorrect terminology to the correct terminology, rather than the other way round. I'd note that the heraldic authority has noted that whilst Union Flag is the correct terminology the phrase Union Jack does have a significant amount of common use and whilst incorrect is nonetheless familiar. Random Acts of Language (talk) 22:49, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

As you say Union Jack has common use, so why not change the name under the policy WP:COMMONNAME? We are not debating what the correct term is, just that should it be called Union Jack as that is a common name. --JetBlast (talk) 22:51, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
Because I prefer accuracy.
Random Acts of Language (talk) 22:54, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
I would also observe that the UK Monarchy source at reference 1 also refers to the Union Flag extensively with a short paragraph at the end of the article highlighting that there are a couple of potential reasons for the term Jack. I'd also note that a fairly quick google search highlights that the majority of official sites, and the BBC, use the term Flag whilst some news media use the term Jack.
It may be that there is a case for a disambiguation page, should there be articles for other Union Flags.
Random Acts of Language (talk) 07:45, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
I'm not ignoring it, I'm aware that it's the view of Bruce Nicol, and that others in the field disagree with him.
His comments certainly have very wide distribution, his view is about the only one that's really wheeled out to support the "Union Jack" argument.
Random Acts of Language (talk) 17:32, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
  • You very selectively quote from the UK Monarchy page. The opening sentence is "The Union Flag, or Union Jack, is the national flag of the United Kingdom." I would have thought this kills off the 'only flown at sea from jack-staff' apocryphal tale. The site goes on to say, "The term 'Union Jack' possibly dates from Queen Anne's time (r. 1702-14), but its origin is uncertain. It may come from the 'jack-et' of the English or Scottish soldiers, or from the name of James I who originated the first union in 1603. Another alternative is that the name may be derived from a proclamation by Charles II that the Union Flag should be flown only by ships of the Royal Navy as a jack, a small flag at the bowsprit; the term 'jack' once meant small." And dare you continue to propogate this garbage about the name being Union Jack as only when the flag is flown from a jack-staff at sea as you do in this debate where you say "Union Jack is only technically correct when the Union Flag is flown as a jack in a ship" - quite clearly wrong.Platinumpaintitblack (talk) 23:47, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Are you aware that it is also the view of the Admiralty, the House of Lords and the United Kingdom Parliament? You are ignoring them too as they have all sanctioned the use of Union Jack as the name of our flag. As well as the fact you are indeed ignoring Cdr Bruce Nicolls OBE RN (Rtd) who is important enough to have a whole page on the Flag Institute website. Please provide any official proof that the story about the 'jack-staff' is correct. I have provided proof and you simply ignore it. Platinumpaintitblack (talk) 23:17, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
  • If you prefer accuracy please read and digest the Flag Institute website page which says "It is often stated that the Union Flag should only be described as the Union Jack when flown in the bows of a warship, but this is a relatively recent idea." Note: "relatively recent idea"! It states: "From early in its life the Admiralty itself frequently referred to the flag as the Union Jack, whatever its use, and in 1902 an Admiralty Circular announced that Their Lordships had decided that either name could be used officially. Such use was given Parliamentary approval in 1908 when it was stated that "the Union Jack should be regarded as the National flag"." Therefore the name "Union Jack" is not slang, vernacular or simply the common name used by all: it the official, legal and sanctioned name. As well as being the common name used by all.Platinumpaintitblack (talk) 08:43, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
Might I suggest that you review behaviour policy and remind you that one should focus on the substance of the argument, not the individual presenting a position.
Random Acts of Language (talk) 07:14, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
  • I have removed any contentious issues. Sorry if I sound frustrated but I really feel that the urban myth of the jack-staff must be addressed as it threatens to change the name of the national flag - with no basis of truth behind the reasoning. May I suggest you supply concrete evidence to support your own initial claim (above) that that the name 'Union Jack is only technically correct when the Union Flag is flown as a jack in a ship.' I have show as evidence that this is a 'relatively recent idea' from the pages of the Flag Institute, "..the national vexillological organization of the United Kingdom". You dismiss that out of hand. I have used the very site the you quoted, The British Monarchy site, to show that the origins of the name Union Jack are not known: there are a number of possible reasons. They also call the flag the Union Jack in the illustration of the flag. You have also not commented on the Parliamentary approval given to the name Union Jack.
  • Strong oppose - Union Flag is the correct term, as has been explained numerous times above. There is a redirect from Union Jack to Union Flag, so the fact that the so-called "common name" is Union Jack doesn't matter. If Wikipedia wishes to be known as an encyclopedia, then it should ensure that all pages are referred to by their correct name and not messed around with just to save a handful of moments redirecting from one page to another.DAAdshead (talk) 14:58, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Union Jack IS the correct term too! Read The Flag Institute website page which says "It is often stated that the Union Flag should only be described as the Union Jack when flown in the bows of a warship, but this is a relatively recent idea." Note: "relatively recent idea"! It states: "From early in its life the Admiralty itself frequently referred to the flag as the Union Jack, whatever its use, and in 1902 an Admiralty Circular announced that Their Lordships had decided that either name could be used officially. Such use was given Parliamentary approval in 1908 when it was stated that "the Union Jack should be regarded as the National flag"." So pedants who keep trotting out the urban myth of the jack-staff are entirely incorrect. Union Jack was and is used by the Admiralty in all circumstances, parliament has sanctioned the name as the official name of the nation over 100 years ago, and the Flag Institute confirms that the apocryphal tale going round that the name Union Jack should only be used when flown at sea from a jack staff is a 'relatively recent idea'. What more evidence do you need? To turn a blind eye to these facts is bizarre indeed. Add to that the fact that (whatever is said on this page) the vast majority of people here and abroad call it Union Jack and I would have thought that pedants would get behind the Union Jack name rather than another name disinterred about 20 years ago and now much in vogue with the BBC who have done much to propagate the urban myth of the jack-staff. Their propaganda has been one of the main drivers to the alternative name 'Union Flag' taking hold. If you go back 20 years and more you will never hear the name used by any politician, broadcaster or school teacher. Now these various quasi-official groups have been taken in (or wish to be taken in as it is politically correctly expedient), the name "Union Flag" is gathering some ground and thus is being used - but only because of flawed history about the origins of the name Union Jack! An enthusiastic body of misguided pedants busy pushing this modern myth threaten to bury the entirely correct and commonly used name: "Union Jack" if we let them.
  • The bizarre aspect of Wikipedia is that some shady authority has ensured 'Union Flag' appears everywhere on Wiki even where the original source states Union Jack. Here is my proof: Check the Australian government's official description of their flag: http://www.anbg.gov.au/oz/flag.html "The Union Jack in the upper hoist quadrant or first quarter.. denoting Australia's historical links with Great Britain. The Union Jack itself is composed of red and white intersecting and overlayed vertical and diagonal crosses on a blue background..." And yet Wiki when describing the Australian flag uses the 'Union Flag' which is wrong - according to the description that the Australians use themselves. Let's look at New Zealand. Their official government website states: "The New Zealand Flag has a royal blue background with a Union Jack in the first quarter, and four five-pointed red stars with white borders on the fly." http://www.mch.govt.nz/nz-identity-heritage/flags/description-and-dimensions. And yet again Wiki 'translates' this description to state that: "The flag of New Zealand is a defaced Blue Ensign with the Union Flag in the canton, and four red stars with white borders to the right." The Union Jack name is universally used by every other nation in the world when describing the flag of the United Kingdom and any other flag that feautures the Union Jack. Why do some people in the UK persist with this madness that Union Flag is more common and more correct? It is perverse in the extreme. And yet the effort to usurp the Union Jack is extremely well orchestrated and organised with a forcefulness that suggests obsession on the part off the Union Flag enthusiasts - to the extent that Wiki uses Union Flag incorrectly. No one has explained in this debate why the change from Union Jack to Union Flag should be made. Stating that 'Union Jack' is incorrect is a falsehood as I have shown with the Flag Institute reference. Denying that it is not in common usage is peverse indeed. What is the motivation behind this well-planned and synchronised campaign to bury the name Union Jack? Someone please explain. Platinumpaintitblack (talk) 18:01, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Very true. I also looked up the USA Grand Union Flag. The USA describes on its official website, the 1776 version of the Grand Union Flag as “…13 alternate red and white stripes and the British Union Jack in the upper left-hand corner (the canton).” http://www.usa-flag-site.org/history.shtml. Here again on the Wiki page the description of the 1776 flag is “This flag consisted of 13 red and white stripes with the British Union Flag of the time (prior to the inclusion of St. Patrick's cross of Ireland) in the canton.” The pedants are winning - despite the fact they are wrong. Twice on the BBC I have heard debates where an official from the Flag Institute has confirmed that Union Jack and Union Flag are interchangeble - and yet the BBC persist with Union Flag as the default name. My fear is that ‘someone’ in officialdom has decided that the name Union Jack is politically incorrect. Maybe because it has possible Christian connotations? In a multi-cultural society maybe the motivation is political correctness, as we cannot all pull together under a Christian flag? The non-denominational version of Union Flag is much safer. And so to perpetuate the ‘jack-staff’ story with such organised and concerted effort has the result that the politically incorrect name is driven out of usage over time. Once the name Union Flag is firmly established the proponents of that name can ignore argument about the exactitude of the ‘jack-staff’ story and simply claim that it is correct through common usage – regardless of the fact that the alternative name had become popular by the propaganda of an apocryphal explanation in the first place.Platinumpaintitblack (talk) 10:03, 28 August 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Platinumpaintitblack (talk • contribs) 10:00, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm in danger of agreeing with both sides. The establishment of the flag and jack was 1 January 1801 and both are in the Royal Proclamations of that date referring to the Union Flag (Proclamation Declaring His Majesty's Pleasure concerning the Royal Style and Titles appertaining to the Imperial Crowvn of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and its Dependencies, and also the Enfigns, Armorial Flags, abd Banners thereof) and later to merchant ships' flags, ensigns and jacks (Proclamation Declaring what Ensign or Colours shall be borne at Sea, in Merchant Ships or Vessels, belonging to any of His Majesty's Subjects of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland and the Dominions thereunto belonging) referring to the Union Jack.

In 1822, for example, you find another Proclamation on the propriety of using the flag, known there as "the Union Jack", though this is naval usage and may refer specifically to the flag authorised for us on a jackstaff.

The ensuing century popularised the name "Union Jack" for the flag in general. What is correct or incorrect or official or otherwise is open to calm discussion, but let us put all material on the table. Hogweard (talk) 11:39, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

  • Both names are correct. One side however claims (Flaggers) that the other side (Jacks) are wrong and produce an apocryphal tale to support this flawed theory which is then accepted by many including influential institutions such as the BBC - and the constant propaganda (for example during the Olympics) of repeated 'Flags' persuades ever more folk to start using the disinterred name. This is what has happened. And now lots of people have been taken in, the 'Flaggers' say "Well, it doesn't matter where the name comes from - it's common usage". But that common usage was encouraged with a false premise. Never mind, think the 'Flaggers' - job done. Once the teachers are telling the kids that it's Flag then Jack is doomed.Platinumpaintitblack (talk) 15:42, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Imagine for example someone started telling everyone that the name 'Britain' should only be used if you are descended from the tribe of the Britons - and that any one else should call it 'Albion'. This ancient name - entirely correct and proper - stuck with pedants who happily, whenever anyone used the name 'Britain', doggedly said "It's only called that if you're descended from the tribe of the Britons! Everyone else should call it 'Albion'" The tale of why it should only be called Britain by certain people had a resonance of authenticity. Then imagine the BBC started calling the island 'Albion'. Official documents started calling it Albion and teachers starting teaching kids the name is Albion. Then, Wikipedia didn't have a page on 'Britain' - if you clicked on that there was a re-direct to 'Albion'. And every single reference throughout the entire Wiki pages was stated as 'Albion'. Sooner or later the name Albion would usurp Britain, and eventually the disinterred name, not incorrect in itself, would become the default name. This, my friends, is what is befalling the Union Jack. And it is a sad day. And I still don't know why people have decided to push the Union Flag name. But from now on I'm going to start my own apocryphal tale - the true name of this island - Albion!Platinumpaintitblack (talk) 15:42, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
There is a great deal in what you say about recent myth-making. In origin however, from the original sources, there seems no doubt that the flag on land was first called the "Union Flag" (in 1801, as its predecessor was in 1634), and that references at the time to a "jack" refer to a flag flown on the jackstaff. The first proclamation in of 1 January 1801 does not mention use at sea and has only the "Union Flag". The second proclamation concerned usage by merchant ships and refers to "ensigns" (flown at the stern), "pennants" (flown at the masthead) and to "jacks" (flown at the bow), and it is not just the Union Jack but also the "red jack" to be flown by vessels with a Letter of marque. All early references to a "Union Jack" are in descriptions of naval flags.
  • Once again, the assertion that the origins are from a jackstaff are not proven at all. It is one of several explanations. From the UK Monarchy website pages "The term 'Union Jack' possibly dates from Queen Anne's time (r. 1702-14), but its origin is uncertain (my italics). It may come from the 'jack-et' of the English or Scottish soldiers, or from the name of James I who originated the first union in 1603. Another alternative is that the name may be derived from a proclamation by Charles II that the Union Flag should be flown only by ships of the Royal Navy as a jack, a small flag at the bowsprit; the term 'jack' once meant small."Platinumpaintitblack (talk) 08:41, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
That said, usage moved on and it is indeed only in recent years that anyone has made a fuss about it and tried to persuade the world that it ever was so, when clearly it wasn't. Maybe they are right to change things back to the way they once were, but that is not for me to say. Hogweard (talk) 22:24, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
  • I can predate your 1801 date quite easily. 1606. "Following its introduction by King James, the flag was variously known as the King’s Jack, the Jack Flag or simply the Jack, and by 1674 was being called His Majesty’s Jack." No mention of Union Flag here then. Scroll forward - 1939. "In considering proposals for the reform of flags, the First Sea Lord stated that that 9,999 of 10,000 Britishers called it the Union Jack." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Platinumpaintitblack (talk • contribs) 00:32, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Bizarre that this discussion was considered consensus for one side or another. — Jon C.ॐ 10:33, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

I just hope that now the page has been moved there will not be attempts to turn Union Flag into a disam page. The "Union Jack" is clearly the most notable/known "union flag". BritishWatcher (talk) 10:39, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Just want to say thanks to all who took time to comment here. Thanks --JetBlast (talk) 10:48, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

How the hell did this result in a Move decision??? At best it should have been No Consensus. Bazonka (talk) 07:59, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
Correct. Not sure how it passed. — Jon C.ॐ 09:19, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
No point complaining here, where the horse has bolted. WP:ANI needs to be informed. -- Jack of Oz [Talk] 07:39, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
Done. I've started a thread at WP:ANI. – Marco79 04:25, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Bloody stupid move. Union Jack is a term used for the flag in specific circumstances, not the general name. I thought we were an encyclopaedia which tried to get things right? Looking over the thread above there seems to be absolutely no consensus for the move at all. - SchroCat (talk) 04:52, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Its a common name of the flag though. The common name isn't always the most accurate. By the majority of the population its known as the Union Jack. I quote from the admin who closed this. "it's not a vote and therefore it is strength of argument that is more important than the raw numbers. As I said in my close, those supporting (in general) gave much stronger, policy-based arguments. They showed that Union Jack is the most common term for the subject and, while many of those opposing asserted that Union Jack was incorrect, none of them provided any evidence to back up that claim." --JetBlast (talk) 08:09, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
"By the majority of the population its known as the Union Jack". Do you have any evidence to support that, or are you just pushing your POV? - SchroCat (talk) 08:27, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
Plenty above. --JetBlast (talk) 08:39, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
No, there isn't, which is why I asked. Some of the references say "commonly known as", but I've not found anything that supports "By the majority of the population its known as the Union Jack": there is a subtle but quite large difference between the two. - SchroCat (talk) 08:46, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

If you say "Union Jack" to an American, we're thinking Brit -- if you say "Union Flag", we're thinking the North in the Civil War [11] or a symbol of a labor organization [12] NE Ent 00:23, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

There is more to the world than just a sub-set of America. Nick Cooper (talk) 10:40, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Americans are probably 10-to-1 more likely to use "Union Jack" than "Union Flag," for what it's worth. Unless it is decisively the other direction in the UK and the Commonwealth, that's the commoner commonname, methinks... Carrite (talk) 18:18, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Truly bizarre that such a hotly contested move was carried out on the basis of an split as close as 11-14, especially sicne it was clearly still being actively debated at the time the discussion was arbitrarily closed. Nick Cooper (talk) 10:40, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Nick, it isnt based on a 11-14 vote. It is strength of argument that is more important, not numbers. Those people for the move presented a better argument. Most of those who where against simply said there reason was is because its wrong, saying its wrong is an opinion, personally i thinking calling it the union flag is incorrect. --JetBlast (talk) 10:55, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

It's typical of Wikipedia that the non-correct usage predominates purely because of the tyranny of the (small) majority. The symbol of British nationhood is NOT a naval jack! It is a flag! The ONLY reason the naval usage predominates in common usage is that the jack was seen more commonly than the flag in foreign countries, due to the fact that Britain 'ruled the waves'. That does not mean that such usage is correct on a page that clearly refers to the land-based flag and the overall symbol, which is a FLAG, not a naval jack. I mean, is it really so hard to get this stuff right? This sort of nonsense is why Wikipedia is generally regarded as a joke. Ianbrettcooper (talk) 21:56, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

If you'd taken the time to read the article, or indeed the discussion, you'd realise that your suggestion that "Union Jack" is somehow inaccurate is wrong. Indeed, it's little more than an urban myth and, being an encyclopaedia, Wikipedia quite rightly ignores such things even if they become relatively popular. --Breadandcheese (talk) 05:42, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
Not an urban myth as you will find with a few minutes study of any decent English-language dictionary by looking up the words "jack" and "jackstaff".MBRZ48 (talk) 23:12, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Clarification request

How will the article (recently moved) be presented on other articles? 1) Will it be pipe-linked as Union Flag? 2) Left as a re-direct to Union Flag? or 3) Directly linked as Union Jack? GoodDay (talk) 03:23, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

If it is linked to Union Flag it will redirect to Union Jack. If its linked to Union Jack it will go direct to Union Jack. --JetBlast (talk) 16:58, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
Let me rephrase the question. How should we present the article in other articles? GoodDay (talk) 06:31, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
If being factual (which I understand to be a Wikipaedia requirement irrespective of the existence of incorrect common knowledge) then it is the "Union Flag". The Union Flag becomes a "jack" only when flown from a jackstaff. It is irrelevant that foreigners don't recognise the correct term; Wikipaedia exists to educate not misinform. --MBRZ48 (talk)
Its not all about being factual "correct". Read the above it will explain why the article is called Union Jack. By the way I am not a foreigner, i am British the vast majority of the time i hear it being referred to as the Union Jack not the Union Flag. --JetBlast (talk) 23:13, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Flag of Great Britain

What are the proportions of the flag of Great Britain? At Flag of Great Britain, it says, 1:2 whereas here its says 3:5. Currently the uploaded version is 3:5. I'm wondering if this should be changed. Regards, Rob (talk) 16:38, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Flag of Great Britain isn't talking about the current Union Flag. For the latter, see the section above. - David Biddulph (talk) 17:10, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
See Union Jack#History. The flag of Great Britain was the original Union Jack. Here is says the proportions were 3:5 whereas at Flag of Great Britain is says 1:2. Rob (talk) 20:55, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Normal proportions

According to this document from the Flags and Heraldry Committee (page 16, “Appendix C: United Kingdom Flag Specifications”), the flag’s normal proportions are 3:5 and not 1:2, and it’s the ensign’s 1:2 that is the exception (and even for ensigns it’s only “customarily” and not always 1:2). Why is the article insisting that 1:2 are the normal proportions? —Al12si (talk) 19:34, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

I agree. I think the current version at Flag of the United Kingdom.svg should be moved to Flag of the United Kingdom (1-2).svg and Flag of the United Kingdom.svg should be redirected to Flag of the United Kingdom (3-5).svg. Rob (talk) 17:54, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Future of flag if Scotland leaves Union

It would be nice to have a section in the article about the issues arising if Scotland votes for independence next year. 86.148.154.237 (talk) 04:34, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

A BBC News article on possible new designs may be found here, and information that there would be no change in practice here.--Tomobe03 (talk) 12:29, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Flag flying on Merchant Navy Day in Scotland

The article says that the Union Flag is flown on this day (3rd September). However, the Scottish Government webpage says that it is the Red Ensign which is flown on this day. I therefore propose to remove this reference. Alekksandr (talk) 22:43, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Agreed. Seems straightforward enough. --Breadandcheese (talk) 05:38, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
Belatedly done.Alekksandr (talk) 22:37, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

New Union jack/UK Flag ideas image

I have created an image showing new flags based on the formula used to create the current Union jack:
File:Alternative national flags for English-Welsh-Northern Irish union.png
Possibly could be included, thoughts? Rob (talk) 19:06, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Until Scotland actually does become independent, I don't think this is really relevant. 88.104.240.111 (talk) 21:22, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

This is an article detailing the Union Flag, it's history and current use. How on earth do your fictional flags have a place on this page? You are suggesting that fictitious flags of your own choice should be included alongside an official national flag that had been in use since 1801? Alright then..... -H — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.199.145.72 (talk) 21:31, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

There already is a "fictional flag" in the section. You're right though. That image should be removed or replaced with a Union Flag with the St Andrews cross removed for simply illustrative purposes. Rob (talk | contribs) 22:17, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Problem with the Pre 1801 Jack?

To my eye the the picture of the Preunion-with-Ireland-flag seems a little odd and clunky; Is its White saltire to thick?.

Can anyone confirm or reject my intuition? Or to put it more explicitly... Were the proportion of the thicknesses's of George's and Andrew's crosses the same on the old flag as the current one. A 3/2 ratio (disregarding fimbriation) as explained in the aricle.

If so I think the picture is wrong; as the crosses look equally thick on this flag.

Just had a look on google images this flag from the National Maritime Museum, http://collections.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/598.html This seems to give me some support.

Yes, I am having a very quiet evening.

Nige — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.220.124.75 (talk) 00:57, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

The design of the flag is nowhere formally defined in the law of the United Kingdom, and there are no official dimensions of its ordinaries. The images on Wikipedia should follow common use, but in the era of hand-sewn flags there was little consistency. Have a look at this example this example and you'll see what I mean. Ibadibam (talk) 01:21, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Union Jack. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

☒N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:38, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Origin of specifications

The heraldic blazon dates to 1801, but it gives no specifications as to colour or geometric proportions. The proposed flag bill of 2008 gives the specifications explicitly, but states that they have long been in use. So we are left with the task of documenting the history of their introduciton. So far, the article is completely ignorant of this.

"The Internet" knows these specifications are correct, but it doesn't have sources. In the best case, this information goes back to the Flags of the World mailing list, where the specifications were posted in 2003:

The official specification is based on 1/30ths of the width (or height) of the flag. The St George's Cross is 6/30ths (1/5th) of the width, the fimbriations to it are 2/30ths (1/15th) of the width. The St Andrew's Cross is a total of 6/30ths (1/5th) of the width, measured perpendicularly to the diagonal. This is made up, in the top hoist corner, top to bottom, of 3/30ths white, 2/30ths red, 1/30th white. These dimensions apply regardless of the length of the flag. An accurate drawing of the flag can be found at this page, or on our page here.
My sources tell me that the proportions of Royal Navy flags were set at 1:2 for ensigns and jacks, and 2:3 for command flags " early in Queen Victoria's reign". Can anyone supply me with the actual date? The general consensus of opinion (backed by the measurements of the one surviving ensign I am aware of) seems to be that this was a confirmation of a situation which had been extant since the last quarter of the 18th Century? Christopher Southworth, 18 April 2003
My impression is that there was no particular date. I think it happened as a matter of practical convenience when, probably about the middle of the 19th century, or a little earlier, the dimensions of naval flags stopped being expressed in 'breadths x yards', and changed to 'feet x feet'. 1 : 2 just happened to be the ratio that, at the time, most nearly expressed the relative size of a breadth to half a yard, and was adopted without any specific instruction. The Admiralty Flag Book of 1889 is not precise: "The practice has been, in regard to the dimensions of flags generally, to make the length twice the breadth at the head. The following appear to be exceptions to this rule. Admiral, length is one and a half times breadth." David Prothero, 18 April 2003

So the ratios can be traced to 1889. The origin of the 1/30th division of the height for the width of the crosses is still completely unknown. All we know at present is that they existed in 2003. I am sure they go back to the 20th century, if not the 19th, but we need a reference. Same for the choice of colours ("referenced" to Flags of the World, but in this case the information is not even in this online source). --dab (𒁳) 13:11, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

tl;dr I don't think we'll ever find any pre-20th century attempts at standardization because it was a matter of custom, not regulation.
I'm reading through the 2008 bill and finding no claim of longstanding use, as you mentioned in your first paragraph. The Admiralty Book of 1889 probably reflects the fact that, through the 19th century, flags were hand-sewn, and for all we know each flag or batch of flags may have varied depending on which ship's purser (or perhaps someone at the Office of Stores) placed the order, and what flagmaker did the work.
A breadth, according to Whispers From the Fleet (1908), BR20 and FotW, was 23 cm or 9 in, about 1/4 yard. Interestingly, Perrin (1922) cites Pepys as giving a 17th-century breadth of 11 inches (being half the width of the bunting as bought by the flagmaker), and describing flags as using roughly half a yard of fly for every breadth. Under an 11-inch breadth, that would be an 11:18 ratio, just slightly shorter than 3:5, whereas with a 9-inch breadth, it would be 1:2. This might be entirely coincidental, but if not it would explain the eventual adoption of 1:2. You can read more FotW discussion on this topic here. As to the cross widths, Southworth has a note on cross dimensions and fimbriation that's a bit obscure, but helps show that the widths of the diagonals relative to each other are fairly logical so as to make the two saltires of equal size, if you consider the fimbriation as part of the width of the St. Patrick's Saltire. But as you say, the width of the diagonals in relation to the overall flag is less clear, and I'd imagine their standardization has more to do with industrialization than anything else. Ibadibam (talk) 00:27, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
With respect to your edits, I'm glad you removed the detail about the St. Andrew's cross supposedly being fimbriated, but I think we introduce another error: were the thinner white diagonal part of the St. Andrew's cross, the blazon would read "cross saltire of St. Andrew ... surmounted by the cross saltire of St. Patrick". But because the blazon reads "quarterly per saltire, counterchanged argent and gules", that second band of white is unrelated to the St. Andrew's cross, and is merely the fimbriation of the St. Patrick's cross. So the Andrew's is 3 units wide, not 6.
Also, Fox-Davies cites Admiralty regulations giving the actual fractions. It would be great to track down the original. Ibadibam (talk) 20:30, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Scottish Independence

What happens to the flag if Scotland leaves the Union? Pseud (talk) 11:14, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

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)
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)
Newsflash! The UK of GB & NI ceases to exist if the vote is in favour. The repeal of the 1707 Acts of Union would result in the Kingdom of Scotland and the Kingdom of England & Northern Ireland. Should the Westminster Parliament retain the United aspect of the title that would be entirely up to them; this word should however have been dropped, along with the flag being redesigned, in 1927, but neither was done on the grounds of cost. Either way, the nearest you'd get to it would be the United Kingdom of England & Northern Ireland (Wales already being part of the Kingdom of England is not mentioned specifically in the title nor is represented in the flag in its own right). It could be that again on the grounds of cost the flag would remain unaltered, but on the grounds of accuracy it should be changed.
Each new state would be a successor state in law and be bound to all previous treaties undertaken by the predecessor state; as in the case of the Czech Republic and Republic of Slovakia in respect of the former Federal Republic of Czechoslovakia. (Not that >50% of Scots will vote in favour, more likely 40-45%).
Scotland would not cede from the UK as Quebec might cede from Canada. Scotland and England together established the Kingdom of GB, which unified with the Kingdom of Ireland to create the UK of GB & I; this becoming UK of GB & NI as of 1927. If Scotland goes, then so does GB, and you're left with UK of E & NI or simply the K of E & NI should the United term used since 1801 be dropped; the only Kingdom left in the pack being England, so no other Kingdom left with which to be United. 81.135.131.228 (talk) 15:01, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
It's not likely to happen - HMG under Jim Callaghan commissioned a report in around 1976 to find out the cost involved should Scotland gain independence, and it turned out that Scotland could only afford independence if the rest of Britain subsidised its defence costs. The predicted naval defence costs amounted mainly to defending the offshore oil industry and fishing grounds, and even with the predicted revenues from North Sea Oil it depended on the Royal Navy effectively giving any Scottish Navy free use of RN naval dockyards, and presumably things have become even worse since Thatcher closed down most of the Scottish ones in the 1980s. Then there were the air defence costs, and Scotland couldn't afford to operate the Nimrods, Sea Kings, etc., and more importantly, even if the aircraft and ships were given to Scotland as their share of the MoD 'divi', they would still be reliant on the UK to maintain them for no cost. The same applied to the training and other supporting infrastructure.
So no, Scotland isn't likely to become independent. Not unless the Scottish taxpayer wants to pay the entire costs of their own defence. I seriously doubt that the taxpayers in the remaining parts of the UK would be interested in doing it. And I also seriously doubt how kindly a future UK government might take to a weak point in the defence of the mainland British Isles possibly open to the risk of foreign invasion should future world events take a turn for the worse, and if you don't believe me then just look at Ireland and see exactly why the British have been involved in that island since the time of Edward I and later Oliver Cromwell. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.7.147.13 (talk) 20:42, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
It probably won't change at all. Nothing happened when Ireland left. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.46.111.124 (talk) 00:33, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
That's because part of Ireland stayed in the UK, so St. Patrick's Saltire still represents something. Ibadibam (talk) 00:36, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
The Union Jack flag would remain the same if Scotland left the UK because the flag was to celebrate the union of the crowns and not the nations. Therefore if Scotland gained independence this would make no difference to the flag. [1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Platinumpaintitblack (talk • contribs) 18:16, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
It's correct that the flag originated the emblem of the monarch, symbolizing the personal union of the crowns. It came to stand for the later political union of the kingdoms by association, and only as a matter of tradition, not decree. I can see how the flag could continue to stand for the Queen and the personal union she represents, but not how it could continue on as a de facto national flag for the hypothetical Kingdom of England and Northern Ireland, given that the political union with Scotland would be dissolved. Ibadibam (talk) 21:55, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
  1. ^ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZHkmvOKPx0
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Union_Jack/Archive_4&oldid=1140123644"