Talk:International maritime signal flags/Archive 1

message: *commons:Nautical Signal Flags
*:de:Flaggenalphabet
*:en:International maritime signal flags
*:es:Banderas de señales
*:ru:Сигнальные флаги
*:it:Codice Internazionale Nautico
Any Questions? I think german version would be the best solution, because it has clear lines. 
--Saperaud 18:50, 24 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, but I've already trumped that series with my own expanded set of signal flag SVG's, at commons:Category:International Code of Signals. --  Denelson83  02:38, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Can someone explain what all the flags at the bottom mean?
Mike Schiraldi 17:11, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for definitions 

message: Does anyone have a reference for the "Prompt" flag? I've never seen it, and I've checked two references and not found it. Jablomih 13:30, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Just for the record, here's the source I used for the prompt flag.  And no, it doesn't explain how it's supposed to be used, so it can stay gone. --  Denelson83  11:42, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Prompt Flag 

message: I added a (tiny) expanded section on NATO usage of INTERCO flags.  It is fairly small, but by rights it shouldn't have been marked as a "minor" edit (why Wikipedia does this by default I have no idea). Oops.  Uriel 00:33, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia doesn't make it by default. Help:Minor_edit. Peachey88 (Talk Page | Contribs) 22:34, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  NATO Usage 

message: I have removed the external link to the Plymouth Gin ceramics plate page for a second time (first time by User:Peachey88).  The page (link) does not add to the knowledge of maritime signal flags but does attempt to sell plates with maritime flags on them with non-standard meanings for each flag (mainly aimed at Gin or drinking Gin).  I'm all for a drink (or more) but the link doesn't belong here.  Please discuss reasons to have it added to the article here with others before adding it back in.  HeadSnap (talk) 15:16, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links to spam pages 

message: Would someone add a bit of history to the intro of this article, e.g. Who devised this system of flags? Where and when did the designs originate? Is there any logic at all to the sequence, or are they simply random? Which organization was responsible for approving the change from the historical number flags to the modern ones and when? When were the flag shapes standardized? Etc.  Charvex (talk) 03:08, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The article on on the International Code of Signals has some of the history.  The ICS was built on successive developments, of which some of the details can be found in various places.  E.g., in earliar versions there was a mixture of flags (properly, the rectangular shapes) and pennants (the tapered or triangular shapes) for letters and numerals.  This was deemed confusing, so the pennants were moved out and now are only numerals or substitute/code flags.  Also, in an early version the vowels were left out to  avoid any chance of forming, in any language, "indelicate" words.  It's because of this kind of stuff I think this article could be wonderfully developed.  (See my proposal, below).  - J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 22:02, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: A small amount of history can now be found in the new article Maritime flag signalling.  Follow the links for more. J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 02:19, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  History of this system? 

message: Since when has ROMEO had a single letter meaning? Forgive me if one has been snuck in when I wasn't looking, but last time a read a copy of the International Code of Signals, Romeo definitely didn't have a single letter meaning. 94.197.213.106 (talk) 13:35, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. I think I've taken out that very bit before — but it keeps slipping back in? We could make a stronger statement somewhere that naval usages should go somewhere else. But I am reluctant to invest much time into this article. And it may be useful in keeping the flies off of the related articles. ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 21:47, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Romeo, romeo... 

message: I would to mention several items which, though they may seem just small nits, do go to the accuracy and even professionalism of Wikipedia.
First, the flag names (phonetic alphabet) just added are not merely "nautical".  They are established in a formal standard (see International Code of Signals), and that is the authoritative source to which we should refer.
Second, the correct spellings are "Alfa" and "Xray" (not Alpha and x-ray).  These are fairly wide-spread errors, but they are still errors.  See the standard.
Third, and as I have mentioned in the prior section, this article itself is rather incorrect.  I have created three other articles (International Code of Signals, Maritime flag signalling, and Naval flag signalling), which I believe better cover the general subject.
There are some parts of  this article that could be moved to the Naval flag signalling article, but after that I suggest that this article should be taken down.  For this reason I think we should not be doing any work on this article.  - J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 00:03, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re accuracy. 

message: I am reluctant to do any editing on this page, believing it should be phased out in favor of the other pages mentioned above.  But as long as this page is up it should be maintained, so I have removed some anecdotal material about the Zulu flag that went beyond the "ICS meaning".
I would like to point out that I am not against anecdotal material if it contributes an the article by illustrating some point or making it more interesting (and provided it is presented properly, including citation).  But it seems there is a tendency to throw in any factoid we happen to know about a topic just because we know it, without consideration of how it might contribute to the article.  Which then increases the level of distracting clutter, and weakens the integrity and cogency of the article. In this case the anecdotal material, although not uninteresting, was not in the scope of "ICS meaning".  If anyone really wants to include this material I would suggest a new section, something along the line of "Notable uses" or some such, and then include a selection of such notable uses.  (Search some of the other flag websites for examples.) - J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 22:47, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anecdotal material. 

message: To the various folks who keep "fixing" things that you "know": you really ought to look before you leap.  E.g., please do not make changes just on what you think is correct, but take a look at the source.  If you do not trust this chart,  download the official U.S. version of the ICS and look at it.
It really is Alfa. - J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 20:19, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  It's ''Alfa''. 

message: [Comment moved into new section. -JJ]
Also, shouldn't numeric flags be included here?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wordensong (talk • contribs) 14:07, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I would say "yes" – and "no".  Yes, because the numeric flags are just as much part of the Code as the alphabetic flags.  But also "no" because I think this article should be removed.  Its original conception was flawed, it has various deficiencies, and is (I think) well and sufficiently replaced by the articles on International Code of Signals, Naval flag signalling, and Maritime flag signalling. In brief, I think it should be abandoned rather than fixed. - J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 20:24, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Numeric flags 

message: Anybody know what the last two columns are in http://hyc.org/system/files/Signal-Flags.pdf?  I'm also curious about the flag labeled "CA".  I've always known that as AP (Answering Pennant).  Is CA some alternate meaning for that?  -- RoySmith (talk) 19:19, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Those are U.S. Navy (and NATO) flags; see Naval flag signalling#NATO flags.  CA is "Code Answering", meaning the flaghoist is ICS.  I think that image is from John Savard's page (see external references), look around there for more info. - J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 22:00, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alternate numbers and codes? 

message: Tom: regarding your new addition, "Additional Meanings for U.S. Navy". Certainly you realize that all of these flags, not just Romeo and Bravo, have additional meanings in naval usage?  So why should just these two be featured?  Also, this article is about maritime usage, which is usually considered non-naval.
I think your addition here is quite out of place (as well as incomplete).  But as you seem to know something on the topic of naval flag signals, and a fuller treatment might be of interest, would you be interested in working up a fuller treatment at Naval flag signalling? ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 00:14, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  U.S. Navy? 

message: I would like to make some revisions to the flag files as well as their presentation on this page. Because these changes will be significant, I'm raising the issue first on this Talk page before modifying the actual file.
First, as some of the flags have borders and some (even those with significant white areas) do not, I propose removing the borders in all cases. This is consistent with flag depictions generally in Wikipedia, as evidenced by the flags below (just to give a small example to illustrate my point):
Image:Flag_of_the_Vatican_City.svg | Vatican City
Image:Flag_of_Finland.svg | Finland
Image:Flag_of_San_Marino.svg | San Marino
Image:Flag_of_the_Canary_Islands.svg | Canary Islands
Image:Flag_of_Chile.svg | Chile
Image:Flag_of_South_Korea.svg | South Korea
Image:Flag_of_Indonesia.svg | Indonesia
I was unable to find any examples in Wikipedia of flags that include borders. While I don't doubt that some examples exist, it is clear that the preferred design in Wikipedia omits the border around flags even when that lack of a border makes white areas of the flag blend with the light background. This makes sense especially with these public domain images, as it creates a "pure" source that can be used in a variety of situations.
Second, I would like to modify the presentation of the flags, removing them from the gallery and putting them in a table. This will allow the background formatting I'll mention below and will also facilitate a clearer distinction between the flags' standard meanings and their meanings when followed by numbers.
Third, I propose to add both the NATO and ICS number flags in a new section.
Fourth, in the aforementioned tables I would like to make the background of the flags a light gray to make the flag edges more obvious without their borders. I think this has been done to good effect on the German page, and I'd like to reproduce it here.
Following are tables illustrating these suggested changes. Please comment here if you see any problem with this proposal. Absent any complaint, I'll make these updates in a couple of weeks.
:This discussion continues below at #Revisions discussion. ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 19:15, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revisions to Flag Presentation 

message: Number
    NATO Flag
    ICS Flag
  
  
    0Zero
    
    
  
  
    1One
    
    
  
  
    2Two
    
    
  
  
    3Three
    
    
  
  
    4Four
    
    
  
  
    5Five
    
    
  
  
    6Six
    
    
  
  
    7Seven
    
    
  
  
    8Eight
    
    
  
  
    9Niner
    
    
  
--JoeDeRose (talk) 20:30, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Number Flags