This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
I've added 1964 to present for the flag of Prince Edward Island. I got the information here: http://fotw.vexillum.com/flags/ca-pe.html
You can remove it if you disagree. --BarLaf 15:05, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
Flag of the Northwest Territories
Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
I've added 1968 to present for the flag of Yukon Territories. I got the information here: http://www.gov.yk.ca/yukonglance/flag.html You can remove it if you disagree. --BarLaf 15:16, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
Flag of Nova Scotia
Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
On the Nova Scotia governement site, it says that the flag has been used since 1929. But it doesn't talk about official recognition from the province. Should 1929 been inserted on the page? http://www.gov.ns.ca/legislature/HOUSE_OF_ASSEMBLY/Symbols/flag.htm --BarLaf 15:21, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
Francophone flags
Latest comment: 17 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Go right ahead and move them, I have no problems with it. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 01:31, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
The descriptions turned out to be copied directly from various FOTW articles, so I ended up rewriting and shorten them instead. This article should probably be checked further for copyvios... -- Himasaram 12:21, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
Logos
Latest comment: 14 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion
Why does this article contain the logos of random municipalities? This is a list of flags, not logos. Perhaps a separate list of logos could be created, but they seem misplaced here. While it's just a few random municipalities at the moment, conceivably the entire list could be overwhelmed with logos (as they are used by every level of gov't, from the feds on down), which would seem disruptive to the point of this article, which is to present a list of flags. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 18:52, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
Okay, then, since there have been no comments, I will remove the logos. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 20:50, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
Coast Guard Flag
Latest comment: 14 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion
This flag is national in scope and flies over Canadian Coast Guard vessels. However the agency is neither military nor is it a law enforcement agency. The flag is offical. I am not sure where on this article this flag might be placed, but I think it should appear there. 67.86.75.96 (talk) 04:28, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
Vertical diband maritime flag with a red maple leaf emlem on a white background at the hoist end, charged with a pair of gold or yellow stylized fish or whales swimming in opposite directions in a blue background on the fly.
Perhaps make a new section called Ensigns and stick it here. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 04:32, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the suggestion. I have placed the table in a new "Ensign" (singular) section — just after the "Military flags" section. 67.86.75.96 (talk) 04:54, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Am just floating this around for discussion before doing anything. However, I think that the GG's flags would be better suited under the Vice-regal Flags section. My justification is that the GG is primus inter pares with her other vice-regal representatives (the LGs). If I don't hear back in a week or so, I'll make the change. Jagislaqroo (talk) 02:56, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
Order
Latest comment: 13 years ago16 comments5 people in discussion
I've just reinstated the order that more closely reflects the actual precedence structure for flags in Canada and brings the page back almost to way the it was for some time prior to User:Fry1989's re-ordering. Two things of note: The Queen's Canadian standard is not a federal flag; she uses it throughout the country, at federal, provincial, municipal, and military events alike. Also, placing the national flag first does not work within the arrangement on the page, pulling it out of the federal section it belongs in, and incorrectly elevates it above both the Queen's standard and that of the governor general. --ĦMIESIANIACAL 20:18, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
I see what you mean, but the problem is what about the LG's flags? They take precedence over the National flag and any other falg as well in their respective provinces except for the Queen's Standard. Should we put them on top too? Fry1989 (talk) 20:38, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
Yes, I wasn't sure if the LGs' flags preceeded the national flag, but if they do, I see your point. Should it then go:
Royal
Viceregal
Federal
Provincial
Federal
National
Military
Coast Guard
Ceremonial
Crown corporations
Provincial
...& etc?
I only separate the viceregal flags into two sections because of the difference between federal and provincial jurisdictions. However, eliminating those and having a unitary viceregal section might be preferable. --ĦMIESIANIACAL 20:52, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
Looks good ,,However to solve the problem of the national flag not being first y dont we use Template:Infobox flag as we do on the main article...Moxy (talk) 21:01, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
That actually is a great idea, wish I thought of it :P Fry1989 (talk) 21:02, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
I don't quite understand how the infobox relates to this page, though. It's for articles on individual flags, not lists of flags. A photo of the Canadian flag could go at the head of the page, perhaps. This photo shows multiple flags in this list, including the national one. Or this one (though the Canadian flag is unfortunately bisected by a pole). This image is also quite good. --ĦMIESIANIACAL 21:16, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
I'd actually recomend This photo if I may, as it shows the flag unubstructed, as well as a Canadian Hero. Fry1989 (talk) 21:23, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
The page is already filled with flags, why does there need to be more pictures? 117Avenue (talk) 02:29, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
Not more... replace the 2 in teh top right corner with File:Canadianwarmuseummgs.jpg as it has all the provincial flags or something similar.Moxy (talk) 16:58, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
That image doesn't highlight the national flag. --ĦMIESIANIACAL 17:02, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
O well i see....what about Ottawa flag...Moxy (talk) 01:00, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
To be honest, I've no issue with using File:Canadianwarmuseummgs.jpg, but if we do, I'd suggest it replace the one of the Vancouver, BC, and Canadian flags and shift to second place, behind a new image of just the Canadian flag to be put at the very top; the one of the national flag and Terry Fox statue is nice, but I feel the presence of the statue detracts from the main purpose of the illustration: the flag. --ĦMIESIANIACAL 01:42, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
I don't really agree with putting the royal and vice-regal flags first, if this is CANADA'S flag, the most basal flag, that is the flag of CANADA, should be first. I would also like it if the provincial and territorial flags followed however that is only an opinion.ThisguyYEAH (talk) 21:57, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
This is not the article on the Flag of Canada, I agree with the order of precedence. In fact I am going to reorder the provinces/territories to precedence rather than west to east. 117Avenue (talk) 22:30, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
Government of Canada guidelines state that the personal standard of the Queen - who is the personification of the state - and the flags of the viceroys - as the Queen's personal representatives - come before the national flag. I'm not sure that the commissioners' flags are where they should be, though. --ĦMIESIANIACAL 22:33, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
Cadet Flags
Latest comment: 13 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion
I have noticed that cadet flags are not shown nor has anyone cared to put them. This isn't boy's scouts, this is a government(public) agency, not a civil(private) one. It's not even a civil company operating under the government assistance, it is completely operated, funded,and administered by the department of defense. Cadet Flags should go in their own section under military and police(where are the police flags?). The problem is however that they are not in the wanted format for this article; there are even some that are missing.
Unfortunately the old Royal Canadian Sea Cadet flag was deleted. This was the old file name- File:Royal Canadian Sea Cadets Flag (Old).PNG. Another blow is the lack of dates and historic flags for RCAC, RCAirC, and the Royal Canadian Army. ThisguyYEAH (talk) 02:05, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
Actually as per WP:NFG we cant add them to this list as most (if not all) are copyrighted.Moxy (talk) 02:11, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
Yeah I know but what I'm saying is to reproduce the flags in the same style as the rest of the gallery as done with the flags of the commissioners of the territories and reproduce it under the flag, seal, emblem, coat of arms and crest liscensing or the free use license. I will also request to create the old Royal Canadian Sea Cadet Flag. It's not that hard. The ONLY difference from the current one is that the Union Jack is in the canton and not the Maple Leaf Flag.ThisguyYEAH (talk) 01:52, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
Cadet Instructors Cadre Branch Flag
Latest comment: 13 years ago5 comments3 people in discussion
As for the Cadet Instructors Cadre flag it has a special copyright that does make allow it to be used in the gallery. Please check it out for more details.
Used in camps to show the presense of the CIC. They can not be saluted but neither draped over a casket
The flag is made up of the three Canadian Forces elemental colours behind a centred CIC Branch badge. The gold trim is representative of the cadets who are the primary focus of the CIC Branch. Cadets are the common element that binds the three elements within the Branch.
The image is explicitly non-free. It therefore can't be used in this list, as indicated above the edit window. --ĦMIESIANIACAL 02:16, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
It does NOT say it is explicitly non-free. The license clearly says:
This is a representation of a government, military, regimental, family, or other symbol such as a flag, seal, emblem, coat of arms or crest. This symbol may be copyrighted by its holder. As well, it is known that the representation of this symbol is either copyrighted by the holder of the symbol or is not available under a free licence. There may also be other restrictions on reproduction, including but not limited to article 6ter of the Paris Convention. It is believed that the use of low-resolution images of such symbols
Please add a detailed non-free use rationale for each article the image is used in, which must also declare compliance with the other parts of the non-free content criteria, as well as the source of the work and copyright information.
To patrollers and administrators: If this image has an appropriate rationale please append |image has rationale=yes as a parameter to the license template.
1. Sentence 5;line 2-3: It can be used as both free license or copyrighted, depending of course.
2. Sentence 3;line 4-8: This article/gallery DOES qualify to use this image because we already use the pictures at low resolution (100px), is used to illustrate the symbol in question, and is on the English based Wikipedia! Plus just think about it. If someone were to try to recreate the image from the one displayed on this gallery, they would have to click the image file to view the full size. When they do they will clearly see the license and if they due recreate it, it wouldn't be our fault.
Articles are different than lists, and lists generally do not have a lot of fair use content on the page. What I can suggest is make an article about the cadet and military flags, then link it to the bottom. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 20:16, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
It doesn't specify that it has to be an article. It says: "It is believed that the use of low-resolution images of such symbols on the English-language Wikipedia, hosted on servers in the United States by the non-profit Wikimedia Foundation, qualifies as fair use under United States copyright law." It never mentions any specific use on the English Wikipedia, it says it can be used at low resolution in the English-based Wikipedia in general. (The English Wikipedia is hosted on American servers).
We know they are Canadian flags, we get that. However, NFCC states "Restrictions on location. Non-free content is allowed only in articles (not disambiguation pages), and only in article namespace, subject to exemptions. (To prevent an image category from displaying thumbnails, add __NOGALLERY__ to it; images are linked, not inlined, from talk pages when they are a topic of discussion.)" This is a list, not an article, and fair use images are not allowed in lists. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 03:23, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
In cases of an absent flag...
Latest comment: 13 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
...however the information is present, could it be possible to use a flag placeholder image:
It seems obvious since this is exactly why the file was created in the first place...
It is even used in already existing articles such as:
...should I continue?
ThisguyYEAH (talk) 00:15, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
Y we would show a flag that has no image - as the intent of the page is to "DISPLAY" flags? Plus not sure this low level flags should be included anyways as the links above show no ones displayed the lower level flags like cadets.
Lets just imagine for a second you were right. This raises two very important questions.
Why is there a description of the flag included in the table. It would be quite redundant and pointless to do so. It wouldn't be intended for blind people since, of course, they can't see the description.
Why was the Flag of None even be created if it wasn't even useful for the very reason it was created.
Of course I do not believe that the list of flags talks more about the flags than they are a gallery. If we include the Flag of None yet provide a good desciption of it, the flag could be recreated as done with the flags of the comminsioners. If you don't show that there is a flag without an image, how would people know what image they need to add? The point of using the Flag of None is not to display the flag but rather advertise others to find or create the image. It also looks proffesional: e.g. Have the flag of 7 provinces but have the flag of the lietenant governers of 10 Provinces. Just becaus ethere is no image does not be the flag is not displayed in the List of Canadian Flags. It is just not about Cadet Flags, there are many sub-list in the article that need to be expanded.
ThisguyYEAH (talk) 19:22, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
Cadet Flags...
Latest comment: 13 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion
Encouraged Action:
Please do not place the flag as it is. Just as it was done with the Flags of the Commisioners of the Territories, the same could be done with these flags, however the new improved image should be free use and has too look something like this:
I, the copyright holder of this work, hereby release it into the public domain. This applies worldwide.
If this is not legally possible:
I grant any entity the right to use this work for any purpose, without any conditions, unless such conditions are required by law.
PDPublic domainfalsefalse
The File:Flag of the Commissioner of Yukon.svg is an excellent example of how the final vesrion should look like. Pay attention to how the liscensing, permission, source, author, and other versions were written and pick up on how they did it.
ThisguyYEAH (talk) 20:12, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
Would have to ask others if there worthy of inclusion - but if the flags are Self made and there not exact copies of the originals but differ in some ways - like with File:Canadian Shield.svg (Copyrighted original version by Government) and File:Canadian Coat of Arms Shield.svg (home made version thats not exactly the same as copyrighted version) we can use them.Moxy (talk) 01:48, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
So... is that a yes. are you just saying "yes we can use them" or are you actually making them? Not that I am demanding that you do them or anything. ThisguyYEAH (talk) 18:40, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
I would have no clue in how to go about making them- as for "yes we can use them" technically we could - however i am not sure all will think they are worthy of inclusion in this list. Moxy (talk) 19:46, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
In vs. for
Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
It's asserted in this list that the new standards for Prince Charles and Prince William are for use "in Canada". I see now that the terminology is used in the Prime Minister's press release and as captions for the releasedillustrations. This struck me as odd when I first read it, and now that I see the same is being said of the Queen's royal standard ("Her Majesty The Queen had adopted a personal flag for her own use in Canada"[1], "The personal flag of the Queen for use in Canada"[2], "Her Majesty The Queen has been the only member of the Royal Family to have a flag for use in Canada"[3]), I'm even more perplexed, since the Queen has quite clearly used the flag outside of Canada. Perhaps we should just eliminate the words "in Canada" from the list. --ĦMIESIANIACAL 15:16, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
It might be more accurate to say not that these are flags for use "in Canada" buy for use by the Royal Family when acting in their roles as the Canadian Royal Family, since the Royal Family have different and unconnected roles in various countries. Generally, since the flags are only flown in the presence of the particular member of the Royal Family, and when they are involved in a Canada-related role, it would be the case that they would be used in Canada. There might be exceptions, though - for example, if the Queen or one of the princes were to perform a ceremony at a Canadian military memorial such as Vimy, then their Canadian standard would likely be used.142.167.118.153 (talk) 22:30, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
"Royal Standard"
Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
I know in common parlance one may refer to royal flags as royal standards, but I don't believe that in Canada the Queen's personal flag (and now the new flags for Prince of Wales and the Duke of Cambridge) have ever officially been referred to as royal standards. Jagislaqroo (talk) 18:01, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
Flag of Vancouver Island
Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
I have updated and moved the flag of Vancouver Island to Others/Non-official flags as based on research this was never actually used as flag for Vancouver Island which was suggested in 1988 by Victoria resident, Michael Halleran. Flags of Canada: British Columbia. However it can be said that due to Crown permission in 1865 for colonies to place their great seals on the fly of the Blue Ensign, it could be argued that retroactively this could be an official flag though no official government acknowledgement to that affect has been made to date. Thoughts? --Skippingrock (talk) 00:32, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
Flag of the HBC?
Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Would it ever be considered that the Flag of the HBC be a historical flag of Canada? Thoughts? --Skippingrock (talk) 00:33, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
Flag Creation
Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
I'm wondering if there's someone who can assist me in creating flag images. I don't exactly have graphic design skills, but I'd like to add some flags to this section. If you have some guidance, send me a message. Mr. Vitale (talk) 06:32, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
That is who I was looking for for my cadet flags!(see above)ThisguyYEAH (talk) 11:21, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
Order of Quebec flag
Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion
Latest comment: 12 years ago29 comments7 people in discussion
I am more than a little confused by User:117Avenue's objection to the addition of the municipal flags. His edit summary indicated something about a violation of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Canadian flags; but, while I do see there some suggestions to remove all the municipal flags, they're based on the presence of non-free media. In adding the municipal flags, I was careful to check that all the images were free before I placed them here. One individual at the AfD mentioned removing all municipal flags because once the non-free images are removed the list is "incomplete"; yet, we've other groupings of flags here that are incomplete: those of the territorial commissioners, unofficial regional flags, and military flags, for instance. So, the logic behind deleting all the municipal flags seems fuzzy, at best. --ĦMIESIANIACAL 01:34, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Because we can't list all municipal flags, we shouldn't start adding them. It implies there is criteria for city inclusion. 117Avenue (talk) 02:46, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
I just addressed the contradiction in that thinking; but, again: What is it about the incomplete list of municipal flags that implies a criteria for inclusion that the incomplete lists of military, commissioners', first nations, and unofficial regional flags does not? --ĦMIESIANIACAL 03:16, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Also not sure of the thinking here...whats the problem? Y are this additions begin reverted... besides the fact one person thinks its odd... non of them are nonfair use as noted in the revert...So could you explain Y your deleting other peoples contributions besides your POV??? I was just about to add Ottawa.Moxy (talk) 03:48, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
I didn't know the military list is incomplete. I am not sure how many other ways I can say this, the flags listed contribute to the make-up of the Canadian monarchy, government, and militarization, there are thousands of municipalities in Canada, we can't say any are more important than others, and we can't get novice editors thinking that their flag got missed, to have them add it. 117Avenue (talk) 04:52, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
You're arguing for one list to go because it's incomplete but are content to let multiple others stay despite being incomplete. Given the difficulty of ever getting the full collection of military flags or historical flags, fairness and consistency would indicate that you feel they should be deleted as well. Why don't you? --ĦMIESIANIACAL 05:05, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
117Avenue...What are you saying more important ?? No one said anything of the sort,..........What you should be doing is asking that the municipalities be moved to there own article because there is so many...Instead you have deleted valid contributions by others because YOU think people will be offended. (we dont care because Wikipidia is not censored) Wikipidia is here to grow and expand ..this would be the opposite that you have done. ....So i would suggest you reinstate the deletion and perhaps ask for a split of the municipalities to there own page. Intime i would guess this new page could be filled...its not our fault your municipality copyrighted there flag and it cant be added....this does not mean the other cities have to be deleted because as a municipality they realized that public domain flags are good for recognition and tourism. Moxy (talk) 05:15, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Well, I imagine that the 'incomplete list' templates I've just added to the incomplete lists would eliminate any editors' suspicions that their city was left out because of some particular bias. And it would encourage them to add what's missing; as you say, Wikipedia has no shortage of space. That said, 117Avenue does have a point if there really are thousands of municipal flags; the 'incomplete list' template would likely be there forever. Are there really thousands of municipal flags? Or is that just an exaggeration? --ĦMIESIANIACAL 05:27, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
I have no problems listing municipal flags, but this article is long enough as it is. Please create a new page with some sort of criteria, and provide a link to it under a new section. Just be aware people will constantly add non-free flags to that article, and it will regularly need to be cleaned up to avoid violating WP:NFLISTS. If you are not interested in maintaining the new page, I would advise against creating it, as it will likely get deleted for violating WP:NFLISTS. --Svgalbertian (talk) 14:25, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Yes i think its best to make a new page as well..In Canada most municipal flags are fairuse ...just the odd conservative cites copyright there flag. But being afraid of violating WP:NFLISTS is no reason to not make the page nor is maintaining it. Moxy (talk) 14:39, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
What I frequently see happen is that non-free media gets removed from a list article, but the free media is left behind being used in the same manner the non-free media was being used. Later, unaware editors put the non-free media back in, not understanding why its not there. It creates a long, slow, drawn out edit war of sorts with many different editors. I'm not saying I'm against free media being used in lists. But, I think there needs to be some consideration of the role of media (free or not) in a list article. Sometimes, it's inclusion really does nothing to add to the article. An even more abstract question; is a list really appropriate for an encyclopedia anyways? Are there any secondary sources dealing with the list subject in general or is it a collection of information for the sake of the collection? In any case, violating WP:NFLISTS is trivially easy and happens all too often in lists like this particular one. The very nature of the list makes it impossible for the list to be complete without violating WP:NFLISTS. --Hammersoft (talk) 14:39, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Yes, that's why I put the editnotice on. As for addition of free images, that has to be an editorial decision; it doesn't have any effect on our non-free policy, obviously. What we need to be careful of is editors saying "well, all the images in list X are free apart from these few, so it'll be OK just to add a couple of non-free images". It won't. Black Kite (t)(c) 15:47, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
I find that editors all the time add non-free media into articles without a proper fair use rationale and it has to be deleted; I don't see how a list is any different. But, its true that, given the requirements of WP:NFLISTS, this list will likely never be complete. Does that justify its deletion? And the answer to that question could then have ramifications for all the other lists of flags out there. --ĦMIESIANIACAL 16:19, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
So we still have not dealt with the deletion of the material...we going to undo the delete or should we start a new page??Moxy (talk) 16:24, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
I'd only start a new page once this one is getting near its max limit. --ĦMIESIANIACAL 16:26, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
I agree i will add them back now!Moxy (talk) 16:27, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
As I said, adding or deleting free images is completely a content decision. Black Kite (t)(c) 17:02, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Hang on a second
File:Flag of Cornwall, Ontario.svg - this has completely the wrong tag on it - it suggests that the uploader is the copyright holder, which is clearly wrong. What is the copyright status of this and the other municipal flags? Black Kite (t)(c) 17:06, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
What? Somebody uploaded an image and wrongfully claimed they are the copyright holder? Say it ain't so! :) --Hammersoft (talk) 18:30, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Yes, that's never happened before :) If the image is in the public domain, what would be the point in creating a self-made version of it? I'd like to see some evidence that this flag is PD, or I think it (and the others like it) probably need to be removed. Black Kite (t)(c) 19:58, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
I am the creator of that rendering, it was not copied from anywhere. Many copyright statements on Commons pertain to the rendering, not the design. If a flag can be recreated from the blazon, then it is fine for use on Commons as a free image. This example I would create the blazon as follows: A golden vertial triband with a black Canadian pale. A golden shield in the center of the pale contains the roundels of the coat of arms of Cornwall, UK. The roundels are outlined with two shields, decorated with fleur de lis on each corner and edge, facing inwards and outwards respectivly. That being said, if any image has copyright problems, then they should be addressed per image.--Svgalbertian (talk) 20:46, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
It was proposed above which is why I added the template, but I will give my proposal on how such a split would be made. There are literally thousands of municipality flags in Canada, and any article should have a criteria and be inclusive of everything in that criteria, not just the ones we have free flags for, otherwise it is a very poor list. Unfree flags should have a filler image such as File:Flag-iconcopyright3.png.The resulting article could either be: the top flags by population, e.g. List of flags of top 100 cities in Canada, or it could be grouped by province, e.g. List of flag of municipalities of Alberta. Such an article could start with the capital, then large metropolitan regions, then cities, then towns.--Svgalbertian (talk) 18:33, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Sorry; I was just being a little tongue-in-cheek with my earlier question.
I agree with the proposal to use the top 100 cities as the guideline for inclusion in the list of municipal flags, as well as with the use of "blanks" where we don't have a free image. I suspect that the addition of the aforementioned will significantly increase the size of the page, but I wouldn't split anything out until we're sure we've reached the recommended article size (though it seems to apply to readable prose and not lists). --ĦMIESIANIACAL 18:51, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
While it might still be within the size limit, you will find this article being dominated by municipal flags, it would be over 50% of the article if you go with 100 cities. It will also be pretty ugly, as we only have 25 to 40 of the 100 flags suggested, with the rest being filler images. Perhaps a fair compromise would be the top 10 or 25, with an expanded article for the rest.--Svgalbertian (talk) 21:22, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Svgalbertian, can you address the issue of the image in the paragraph above (and the others like it) before anything else is done, please? Black Kite (t)(c) 19:59, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
The consensus on the split is not clear, nor the rationale for it. The request appears to be based on a concern about city flags appearing in the list. I took a look at other flag lists, and city flags are sometimes included. There was discussion regarding non-free flags, but as these are not allowed in lists, it wouldn't help splitting out a section simply because it contained non-free flags or was not going to be able to display all flags, as that would be simply shifting the problem elsewhere. The discussion is over a year old, and matters may have been resolved. I have removed the split request tag. If there is still felt a need to split out the section, please start a new discussion based on the current situation, and put forward a rationale for the split. If deciding to again place a split request tag, please use the current date. SilkTork✔Tea time 01:11, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
Latest comment: 3 years ago5 comments3 people in discussion
When you see the words "Canadian flag", I'd hazard a guess that most folks think of the Canadian flag, the Maple Leaf. So a "List of Canadian flags" suggests it contains flags which are or have been used to represent the nation in some respect. Given its content, however, the title of this page interprets "Canadian flags" as meaning any flag from anywhere within the country. Perhaps it would be better to name the page "List of flags used in Canada". That would communicate that the list contains far more than national flags.
Users who land on a "List of Canadian flags" (or "List of flags used in Canada") would logically expect to see the Canadian flag (Maple Leaf) leading the list, certainly 'above the fold' (to use a newspaper term). Yet the Canadian flag does not appear here until position number 21(!). It shows up after five full page clicks down, and then only at the bottom of the fifth screen page (based on my settings). I propose moving the section "Civil and state" to the top of the list. These are the flags most often seen and most associated with the country, while representing the greatest physical areas of the nation. Yoho2001 (talk) 05:56, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
For the article title, either way would makes sense to me.
For the list order, it is listed according to precedence, and should not be changed. For the same reason that seeing a municipal flag listed above a provincial flag, or a provincial flag listed above the national flag would be counter to the rules for flying flags. trackratte (talk) 03:23, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
Precedence seems askew if "Regional (unofficial)" flags come before federal military flags. It seems 'Regional (unofficial)' ones should be placed below civic (which are official), if not Native American and Francophone, flags. (What determines if a flag is 'official'? The Acadian flag was adopted in the 1800s.) Elsewhere, the Historical-National section might be better paired with the Maple Leaf, though I understand a desire to keep the top section a 'current collection'. Thoughts?
Putting royal, vice-regal and commissioners' flags above all others here is problematic. For one, doing so pushes national and provincial emblems so far down, users might think they're on the wrong page. For another, to be complete, even more flags would need to be inserted for all members of the royal family (some 20 in all). While precedence puts them ahead of other flags, it does so only when such individuals are present. Exceedingly rare to see, their infrequency of use, coupled with being banners of individual people, augurs for a place below most of the flags on this list. Consider, too, the flags of governors general and lieutenant-governors take precedence above all royal flags except the sovereign's. Following precedence would mean inserting them immediately after the flag of Elizabeth II, ahead of the other royal flags. Perhaps that could be done, but in a separate section, above Historical.
The Historical-National section could be expanded to include several variations, equally unofficial as those used from 1868-1965, since the flag changed with every province admitted to the union. Yoho2001 (talk) 07:02, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
Over at List of British flags, the order seems to be more in keeping with what I'm suggesting for this page: national and civic flags are first, then military, government, church, et al. Flags of overseas territories are followed by those of their governors, then regions, cities, towns. Historical flags are at bottom, following all current flags, which seems to make sense. Yoho2001 (talk) 23:28, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
The way I see it, the order of precedent should be in accordance to the actual Canadian order of precedence:
i.e. royal, vice regal, national, provincial, municipal, then other miscellaneous flags.
With the flags of federal institutions either going behind municipal flags or behind the national flag given that they are federal agencies/organisations.
OR we can flags in the order of relevance to the average person googling flags:
i.e. national, provincial, municipal, royal, vice regal, then other miscellaneous flags. Blursed Boi (talk) 22:25, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
Municipal flags redux
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Some very sound points have been made here regarding the municipal flags section. Inclusiveness is a worthwhile principle, yet an unconstrained list does hold the potential to overtake the entire article. It is already growing somewhat unwieldy.
Creating a new page with a more complete list of municipal flags seems advisable. The section here could be limited to flags of Canadian urban centres with 100,000 or more inhabitants; fifty cities fit this criteria. Alternatively, if other editors deem a list of fifty to be excessive, Svgalbertian’s suggestion to include the top 10–25 cities is very sound.
Stephanie Lahey (talk) 12:42, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
Provincial flags
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
From reading the various articles on the provincial flags, I am struck by the fact that, in most cases, the flag introduced in the 1960s did not replace an earlier flag but rather replaced no flag at all. It seems unusual for a large unit like a Canadian province to go for decades without any flag, especially in a federal system. Did local government buildings just display the Canadian flag, or no flag at all? jnestorius(talk) 10:40, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Canadian Armed Forces Flags
Latest comment: 3 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion
I've been trying to find an example of a tricolour version of the Candian Forces Flag. I remeber seeing one flying above the head quarters of a naval base along with a few other military bases. It could be described as a Horizontal Tricolour of black (maybe dark blue), red, and airforce blue with the emblem of the Forces in the centre. Does anyone have a copy of the flag or confirm its existence? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.239.176.44 (talk) 15:35, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
I know the image file is called the Canadian Forces Auxiliary Jack, but wouldn't it technically be the Canadian Forces Auxiliary Ensign as it is flown at the back of the ship (akin to the RCN Ensign)?Blursed Boi (talk) 22:10, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
"Pantone" Canadian flag
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Regarding the recent addition of a car flag of the Prime Minister of Canada, what does pantone mean in the phrase "pantone Canadian flag". I know about the Pantone colour-matching system, but I don't understand the significance of using the word in this context. By the way Pantone should have a capital since it is a trademark. Indefatigable (talk) 18:55, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Canadian Pride Flag
Latest comment: 6 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
I'm not sure why it keeps being removed, but I don't see any reason why the Canadian variant of the Rainbow Flag can't be added to Others/Non-Official flags. It is just as much a symbol of Canadian Pride as the Duality Flag or the Flag of the Order of the Orange Lodge. Zachgriff11
Image files are typically removed from articles such as this because of their copyright licensing. There are basically two types of licenses when it comes to images used on Wikipedia: (1) a free license (i.e., free license or public domain) and (2) a non-free license. Some of the files you've recently adding to articles such as File:Flag-Ca-On-Windsor.svg (to this article) and File:Coat of arms of Canada.svg (to National symbols of Canada) are licensed as non-free content, which means that each use of the file needs to satisfy all ten non-free content criteria listed in WP:NFCCP. Using non-free images in tables/galleries/lists like in these articles is typically not allowed per WP:NFG and WP:NFLISTS. In fact, there is a template advising editors not to edit such files to this particular article at the very top of the editing window (go to the article, click edit and scroll all the way to the top and you will see it). So, before you add anymore files to any more articles, please go to the file's page and check it's licensing first. If the file is licensed under a free or PD license, then you probably can add the file without a problem. On the other hand, if the file is licensed as non-free content, you need to make sure that the partcular use satisfies Wikipedia's non-free content use policy. If you're not sure, ask for help at WP:MCQ or WT:NFCC.
As for the pride flag you're referring to in your post, I am guessing that File:Canada Pride flag.png is what you're referring to. If it's not, please provide a link to the file's page. Anyway, "File:Canada Pride flag.png" is licensed as public domain so it's use is not subject to Wikipedia's non-free content use policy; however, the file may be being removed for some other reason as explained in WP:IUP#Adding images to articles. Licensing matters aside, you may have to establish a consensus on this talk page to include it in the article if it keeps getting removed.
Finally, please do not use title case capitalization for section headings; Wikipedia uses sentence case per MOS:SECTIONCAPS. Also, please try and remember to sign your talk page posts. There are a coouple of ways to do this, but the easiest and most common is explained in WP:TILDE. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:53, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
Understandable, but then why does the flag of Windsor appear on the page about the Flag of Windsor? As far as I know those images a part from the Pride Flag are under Crown Copyrights which in Canada are public domain and can be used to educate the public about Canada. The Coat of Arms is under Fair use, and arguably are a more accurate representation of Canada's Royal Arms. There is another file Coat_of_arms_of_Canada_rendition.svg which would also be a more accurate representation, is under Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license, is that fair game? Anyways I would very much like to add these to the articles could you possibly send me some material as to how to go about this, could I possibly add some text regarding the pride flag instead of adding the image if it cannot be used? I don't see why that information can't be put on there. It is a common flag used in Canada and I think it deserves a mention. A lot like other unofficial or commonly used flags it's origins might be difficult to find, that doesn't seem like a reason to withhold it. -- Zachgriff11 (talk)
Non-free use on Wikipedia can be tricky. Wikipedia's non-free content use policy is based on the concept of fair use, but it's purposely designed to be more restrictive for the reasons given in WP:NFC#Background. Flag of Windsor, Ontario is a stand-alone article about the flag itself, so using an image of the flag in the main infobox as the primary means of identification is typically allowed because it is assumed that there will be sourced commentary discussing the flag (e.g., its origin, meaning, imagery, etc.) somwhere within in such an article or such content can be fairly easily added without disrupting the flow, etc. of the article. In lists articles such as this, the focus in not really on one particular entry, but rather the list itself. There may be a brief description provided for each individual entry, but the detail typically required to justify non-free use is not provided. So, that is why non-free content is almost never allowed in such articles. The rationale typically applied to all types of list articles such as band discographies, author bibliographies, actor filmographies, list of notable alumni, list of TV show/movie characters, etc., etc. There has to be a pretty strong justification for non-free use that simply goes beyond simply wanting to "complete the list" or "show an image" for such usage to typically considered to be OK. In such cases, the non-free use policy usually requires that alternatives to actually displaying the non-free image be used instead. So, text or other free equivalent (WP:NFCC#1) or a link (item 6 of WP:NFC#UUI) is often used instead.
After reading all of that, if you feel that seeing this flag in this article actually improves the reader's understanding of what is written about the flag to such a degree that not seeing it is detrimental to said understanding, you're going to have to provide a non-free use rationale clearly explaining why. Every use of a non-free file is required to have a non-free use rationale per WP:NFCC#10c and those that do not can either be deleted (WP:F6) or removed (WP:NFCCE). The rationale should be specific to this particular use and clearly show how all ten non-free content criteria are met. The hardest thing is going to be providing the context required by WP:NFCC#8. Another editor may feel any non-free use you provide rationale is lacking in someway and challenge it via WP:FFD of by tagging the file with Template:di-disputed fair use rationale, but providing the non-free use rationale is the first step and needs to be done before re-adding the file.
As I posted above, Wikipedia's non-free content use policy only applies to files which are licensed as non-free; it does not apply to public domain or CC licensed files. If those files are being removed, then it may be for a reason other than licensing and may require that you esablish a consensus for inclusion on the relevant article's talk page per WP:BRD. This seems to be the stage you are at with respect to the Pride flag. What you can do is find the editor(s) who removed the flag and ping him/her/them to ask for clarification. It could've been removed in error, but there might be an actual reason for doing so. Maybe a consensus has already been established not to include the flag, so check this talk page and its archives to see if it has been previously discussed. Personally, I have to opinion either way and my primary concern only has to do with licensing of image files used on this page. It appears that Ringbang as already posted something more detailed about this, so maybe a ping is not necessary after all.
File:Coat_of_arms_of_Canada_rendition.svg is a file that was uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, and Wikimedia Commons has its own policies and guidlines. Wikimedia Commons does not accept any fair use content, so Commons' files are easier to use in articles than non-free content. This does not mean that the licensing of a Commons file is always correct because files are often uploaded with incorrect licenses (sometimes by mistake, sometimes intentionally) and eventually deleted, but in genreal it can be assumed that files from Commons are OK to use anywhere on Wikipedia. You still need to make sure of WP:IUP, but you won't have to worry about WP:NFCCP. At the same time, if you come across a non-free file uploaded lcoally to Wikipedia that you should be PD or otherwise freely licensed, it is possible to change the license accordingly. Unless you are absolutely sure that such a change will be non-controversial, it's probably a good idea to ask for opinions at WP:MCQ first. I hoped I answered your questions. If I just confused things more, you can try asking at WT:NFCC or WP:MCQ to see if someone else can help you better. --Marchjuly (talk) 03:05, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Would there be any room on this page for some of the historical flags of the trading companies that held powerful sway in Canada from the 17th to 19th centuries, namely those of the Hudson's Bay Company and to a lesser extent the North West Company?
Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
So... I was just wondering if Prince Philip's standard has any official status in Canada (or rather with the Canadian Heraldic Authority, which is the case with the other standards), cause if not, wouldn't that make the flag not an official flag in the country (and not something for this article/section)? Leventio (talk) 06:51, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
Copyright flags
Latest comment: 3 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion
@Nikkimaria: - @Diannaa:
Have restored the page to before copyright concerns...I have a felling this wont last...pls keep an eye on this page guys. Noticed the person in question is also uploading flags with fake non copyright status and changing the status of other as seen here.--Moxy🍁 00:23, 14 July 2020 (UTC)
@Moxy: indeed it has not lasted and this problem now also affects other pages BorderRegions has edited. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 15:23, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
@Moxy: I’m sort of confused on how claiming ownership of images works. Take https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Flag_of_Barrie.svg for example. There seems to be no contest that that file is fine to use. But the creator of that file didn’t actually design the flag, obviously. They may have made that File all by themselves, sure, recreating it on online software.
But that’s all just a recreation of the original flag. The intellectual property of the design itself should actually belong to the original person/people working at the Barrie Municipal Government who came up with the design of the flag and published it. And sure, the flag is clearly fair use for anyone to use. But in order for it become free use, shouldn’t it literally require contacting the BMG, and actually obtaining the personal permission of the individual person/people employed at the BMG who were tasked with designing the flag in 2005? (Unless the city government has a policy that makes it so that all works created by employees belong to the government itself. But even if that is the case, contacting the city and getting the municipal government to officially give documentation signing off the intellectual property as free use should be required). Or is it that because the user made the actual file by themselves, the file is free use, and the flag itself isn’t an issue. If that is the case, if it makes it easier, I could go through all the flags and recreate them in online software myself, and upload those files. Would that solve any issues for all the files? — Preceding unsigned comment added by BorderRegions (talk • contribs) 19:44, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
@Moxy: I've removed the {{Non-free}} tag because the article currently has no non-free files. Please let me know if you think some of the files are incorrectly licensed as free. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 17:16, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Hudson's Bay Company flag (post 1801)
HBC flag (1707-1801)
HBC flag (1682-1707)
North West Company flag (1801-1821)
NWC flag (pre-1801)
.svg)
.svg)
![[2]](http://www.gg.ca/images/royal/queen.jpg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
