Talk:Flag of New Zealand

message: - Removed link to NZ Flag.com petition, as it has been withdrawn.
- Removed link to National Front 'save the flag' site, as this has been deleted (points to NF main page)
--Lholden 11:41, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link update 

message: - Removed section Best design from the talk page as it was off topic - it was general conversation about the article's subject instead of discussing the article 
--sinesurfer 00:18, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deletions Update 

message: In the picture which shows the NZ flag in Auckland International Airport, the left part of the NZ flag is slightly torn!
:And the problem with that is?--Lholden 21:03, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I was under the impression that the NZ flag should not be flown in a dilapidated condition. Wouldn't it be best to show a picture of the flag in a better condition? Kytok 01:01, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, it is a offence to fly the in a dilapidated condition. Brian | (Talk) 07:36, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well yes, you shouldn't fly a dilapidated flag. But it's not an offence to; according to the New Zealand Flag Notice 1977 (a statutory regulation of the main FLAGS, EMBLEMS, AND NAMES PROTECTION ACT 1981) there's nothing illegal about flying a dilapidated flag, or at least I can't find anything in the law. I am, as always, willing to be proven wrong Brian :-) --Lholden 08:34, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

text: I don't think it is an "offence" in the legal sence, however the flag should never be flown in a dilapidated condition. However if you fly it with the intention of dishonouring the flag, 11 (b) might apply. Brian | (Talk) 08:43, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I plead freedom of expression ;-) --Lholden 09:21, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Picture shows torn New Zealand flag

message: A number of changes to this page have been made in line with vexillogical terminology. First, the flag is described as a 'defaced' blue ensign, which it is. Putting the information regarding the pre-1840 flags after this also makes sense, IMHO there should be a sub-section of historical flags of New Zealand linking to the list of NZ Flags.
I have also removed the sentence relating to the Commonwealth as this is inaccurate, there was never a requirement that member states of the Commonwealth retain the Union Flag, nor was this ever a requirement under the British Empire - there are many examples of this. The Commonwealth flag is somewhat different from the Union Flag. As I mention in the edit, it was only a requirement for Colonial Government-owned vessels under the Colonial Navy Defence Act.
Also, the current flag didn't become the de facto national flag until c. 1899, around the time of the Boer war. Most historical texts I have seen prior to this time either show the United Tribes flag or the Union Flag as the New Zealand flag, and it wasn't until New Zealand sent troops to fight in South Africa that we really needed a New Zealand Flag except for on our ships. This was why Parliament enacted legislation to set out exactly what the New Zealand Flag was, because of the confusion surrounding the exact design of the flag.
--Lholden 00:26, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vexillological terms & Update 

message: I have no feelings either way as to whether there should be a link to the petition (which is at least a real paper one and not an online petition) but would like to point out that we now have to links to the same page (www.nzflag.com). Evil Monkey ∴ Hello? 23:53, Jan 28, 2005 (UTC)
:Thanks, what do you recommend? Are such duplications discouraged? Christiaan 00:41, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Couldn't find anything official but I don't think we should have multiple links to the same page. Maybe the link to nzflag.com could mention the petitin. Evil Monkey∴Hello? 00:52, Jan 29, 2005 (UTC)
Someone has re-instated the link to the petition. This petition is to change the flag; it is promoting a particular point-of-view. Unless a link to a petition for keeping the current flag is added then the Wikipedia NPOV rule is broken. Please insert a link to such a petition (if one exists), otherwise I suggest you remove the current link.Arcturus 11:28, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)

text: There is nothing wrong with POV links, as long as the link description makes a clear statement which POV is represented. External links are not endorsements of their content. The link promotes knowledge, that is all. This link is covered by Wikipedia:External_links and Wikipedia:Make_articles_useful_for_readers. You might also like to read Non-neutral links at the bottom of meta:When should I link externally. You are, of course, free to contribute to this article like you are on any other. Christiaan 11:54, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The web page eliciting support by way of petition for a change to the NZ flag imparts little or no knowledge. It is merely the vehicle of a pressure group and is totally biased. It adds nothing to Wikipedia. Thank you for reminding me that I am free to contribute to this and other articles. You must have thought I'd forgotten. Arcturus 13:52, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I repeat, there is nothing wrong with and there is no policy against POV links. Christiaan 15:18, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)

text: Great! Good to see you made it John. —Christiaan 08:39, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link to petition 

message: We should work at citing some sources for all the "some think this" and "some think that" sentences we currently have. —Christiaan 08:51, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citing sources 

message: The article claims that opinion polls indicate a majority are in favour of keeping the current flag. I cannot recall ever seeing such a poll and this link at the nzflag.com website suggests likewise that this is not true . Of course the nzflag.com is obviously not a neutral site but this is a NZ Herald editorial so I highly doubt it will be lying about opinion polls. If no one is able to source/reference the opinion polls I will change it... Nil Einne 09:47, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The problem with opinion polls is that their results depend on their sample and question - and in the case of the flag debate, which flag is put in front of those being questioned. --Lholden 05:51, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference for opinion polls 

message: Flag ratio: 1:2
It looks to me as though this symbol is actually 2:3 not 1:2.  I know zip about flags, but one would presume that a 1:2 ratio would indicate that the flag is two units across for every one up.  But that symbol has three for every two.  --LeftyG 23:22, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The symbol actually has nothing to do with the ratio.  It is unfortunate that the (little-known) symbol is right next to "flag ratio" -- I can see how confusion can readily arise. See Vexillological symbol for the interpretation: the dots (or lack thereof) in the six grid squares indicate how the flag is used. In this case the dots indicate that the flag is used on land by civilians, government, and military, but at sea is used only by government (civilians and the military have different flags). It seems to me that these "FIAV" symbols are useful to so few people that they probably shouldn't be used on Wikipedia, or if they are used they should link to Vexillological symbol every time they are used. Indefatigable 02:48, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flag ratio 

message: I removed the text since the previous version was balanced between pro- and anti- change opinions with decent sized chunks for both sides. The new material is inherently NPOV (showing an alternative flag) in the pro-change group's favour.
The removed text can be seen here. (link doesn't seem to work)
Greentubing 22:59, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What you want is this link. I'm in favour of including this design, since it seems to be notable, but the section would have to be NPOVed. Could you do that? —Nightstallion (?) 07:47, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for fixing the link. Unfortunately I can't include the information in an NPOV way since I don't follow the politics of the flag—I just draw them! But I agree that this design is notable and deserves mention. Greentubing 09:37, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Mh. Do you still think that it would be inherently POV to show this flag? I think it would add to the value of the article to show one of the best designed flags that have been proposed as an alternative, and would not consider that POV in favour of the flag change... —Nightstallion (?) 10:24, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe I should have rephrased my original comment. The flag in itself is good. Its just that the way it was arranged last time was POV imo. But it has to be presented in the context of the pro-change group's argument. I'll put the flag in the "Arguments for Change" section, and maybe someone more informed can flesh it out. Greentubing 04:13, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Great! —Nightstallion (?) 08:36, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Heh, its no problem—this is exactly the way Wikipedia is meant to work! People write things and others come and change it. If anything you should be glad for bringing this to our attention. Greentubing 11:07, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. (Besides, it's a *really* good design. ;)) —Nightstallion (?) 13:53, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've put some of the material back. Comment please. Greentubing 04:39, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks fine to me. —Nightstallion (?) 10:54, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Just put the flag into a box... --Lholden 19:06, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edits of 24 Jan 2006 

message: A timeline of events in the flag debate would be a useful reference, IMHO:
May 1973: Labour Party Congress - a call to change the flag was squashed.
Nov 1979: a proposal to place the silver fern on the fly appeared.
1980: several suggestions arose, including one from the government to consider a new flag, and a newspaper article calling for the same. One suggestion was to use the NZ-ZN in blue and red on a white field, from the flag that was used for the 1974 Commonwealth Games.
Early 1980's: D.A. Bayle introduced a blue-white-blue flag with a blue koru as a proposal.
March 1983: F. Hundertwasser introduced the green koru.
1984: a black and white koru with stars was proposed, and a black flag with four white fimbriated red stars was suggested from a newspaper competition.
Dec 1988: a modified Titman proposal (almost identical to an AusFlag proposal in 1997 for Australia).
1989: at a party conference a call for a new flag was defeated 144:156.
1990: the winning flag in another newspaper competition was a blue-white-green horizontally striped flag, ratios about 8:2:3, with four white stars on the blue stripe in the fly. Another flag seen around 1990 was a blue-yellow-green horizontally striped flag in approximately 10:1:8 ratio.
1994: J. Park proposed a black flag, the UJ in the canton, with white kiwi and ferns in the fly.
1998: James Dignan initiated discussion leading to a white fern above a red diagonal on a black field.
1999: above design modified to white fern on black.
May 2000: proposed designs still appearing, including black-white-green tricolour, with four gold stars and a koru.
--Lholden 07:09, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Unfortunately that timeline (which comes straight from the FOTW website and is therefore copyrighted) isn't correct. Grutness...wha? 01:18, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Flag debate timeline

message: Is the blue color of the NZ flag slightly different from the Aussie one? --Howard the Duck 15:25, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Nope---:Image:Flag of Australia.svg is coded based on a Australian Govt specification for computer renditions of the Australian Flag. :Image: Flag of Australia (converted).svg shows the Australian flag in a standard colour scheme used (or "that should be used") on British-based flags on Wikipedia (the colours in :Image:Flag of New Zealand.svg come from here). Even then, the Australian govt says they use Pantone 185 C for the red instead of the UK's 186 C. 202.89.152.147 00:08, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: So which blue is correct (as in the UK blue)? NZ? --Howard the Duck 06:24, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no single "correct" way of representing a Pantone colour on a screen. Wikipedia generally uses the scheme used for the NZ flag image, but the Australian government recommends a different scheme, which is used instead for the Australian image. Presumably Aust govt publications would also use that blue for the UK and NZ flags. Whether one scheme is better than the other is not an entirely objective question. Whether Wikipedia should stick to one scheme is a difficult question. JPD (talk) 10:54, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blue 

message: I propose separating general information about the NZ flag from the specific information of Flag Reform/Debate because:
[1] Flag debate is now a majority of the content with 1222 words versus 3146 words for the entire entry so one subject of the page overwhelms the general subject.
[2] The underlying subject matter is significant regardless of the viewer’s opinion on flag reform - both sides through the ferocity of their debate deem this subject as important and important subjects deserve their own page on Wiki.
[3] Separating general flag information from specific flag reform and debate is the same format used by the Australian [ Australian Flag | Australian flag debate] and Canadan [ Flag of Canada | Great Flag Debate ] wiki entries.
The subject of flag debate would not be removed  but would be replaced with a summary and link to the new page, I invite your feedback and opinions on this matter.
Sinesurfer (talk) 00:07, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm happy with that. --Lholden (talk) 22:10, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Subject Separation 

message: Hi! Here are the flags you can pick for New Zealand flags. The normal,Red allover then blue stars 44*78=  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.180.170.14 (talk) 02:51, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  About New Zealand 

message: Are the blue textures of these two flags the same or are they supposed to be different? The blues of these two flags in Wikipedia are slightly different and I am not sure if this is correct or not. Thanks,Miguel.mateo (talk) 02:18, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flag of New Zealand vs. Flag of Australia 

message: Viewing this page on a Mobile Device displays the incorrect flag -- if you view the desktop or mobile page via a portable device (mine is an iPhone, but it is occurring on android as well) it displays the blue black silver fern with the southern cross stars. Could this be due to caching? It does not occur on desktop PCs. I find this behaviour oddly inconsistent with the website. Can someone please investigate this further.
-Stewart  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.92.57.126 (talk) 06:35, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Stewart, someone's been updating the main NZ flag file used throughout Wikipedia (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Flag_of_New_Zealand.svg) with the blue & black Lockwood design. Just an idiot being an idiot. Looks like they stopped a couple of days ago. - Elguaponz (talk) 19:40, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Incorrect Flag Issue

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Flag of New Zealand. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080920122358/http://www.bennion.co.nz/mlr/1994/sep.html to http://www.bennion.co.nz/mlr/1994/sep.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:04, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Flag of the United States which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 22:46, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move discussion in progress