Talk:Flag of Washington, D.C.

message: *I am opposed to the move. From the introduction to Wikipedia:Naming conventions:
::Generally, article naming should give priority to what the majority of English speakers would most easily recognize, with a reasonable minimum of ambiguity, while at the same time making linking to those articles easy and second nature.
:Hence the article Jimmy Carter, not "James Earl Carter, Jr." Or for that matter, Washington, D.C. and not "District of Columbia". See Wikipedia:Naming conventions (common names).  --Polynova 14:45, August 22, 2005 (UTC)
*Being that I am the only one to vote on this issue, I'm declaring the vote closed after one week and removing the proposal. Result: no change. --Polynova 21:39, August 29, 2005 (UTC)
:Just to add my thoughts, even tho the move isn't an issue at present...I think that Flag of the District of Columbia sounds more natural to me, altho I'm from near DC. But I think I'd agree that Washington, DC is more common elsewhere. I'm fine with either name for the article, anyway.  --Mairi 03:40, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: On proposed move by anonymous user 132.205.45.110

message: This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 15:29, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: WikiProject class rating

message: Is there an official (DC government?) source for the dimensions etc.? I couldn't find one. PRRfan (talk) 22:08, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Flags of the World has construction details here. Construction details should be incorporated into the article. --D. Monack | talk 22:45, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, done. PRRfan (talk) 19:49, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Official specs

message: Is this true?---->http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X5L_x6RHE4s&feature=related  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.164.52.89 (talk) 15:30, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The flag is based on the medieval British Washington family coat of arms, so it's hard to imagine how it could be true. AnonMoos (talk) 19:10, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Three stars three axees of Empire?

message: Three dots and two bars is the Aztec number 13. Is there an apropriate way to put this in the article without "original research" or a "trivia" section?
Virginia-American (talk) 16:30, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: It's really just a vague coincidence without meaning (and the Maya numeral has three circles, not stars, anyway), so I think it would really better be left off the article. AnonMoos (talk) 19:08, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interesting coincidence 

message: This is the flag of Columbia, the federal district, not of Washington City.  Common usage is about evenly divided, but facts count for something in an encyclopedia.  — kwami (talk) 05:57, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Washington City doesn't exist. – Illegitimate Barrister (talk • contribs), 16:41, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  flag of the district, not of the city 

message: What's the Pantone number of the red used in the flag? --108.60.36.58 (talk) 18:13, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pantone colors? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Flag of the District of Columbia. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add  after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.nava.org/flag-design/survey/state-provincial-survey-2001
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 20:35, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Flag of the District of Columbia. 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/20060205140540/http://about.dc.gov/symbols.asp to http://about.dc.gov/symbols.asp
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:02, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The supposed principle that "No two individuals can have the same coat of arms" has been enforced much, much more strictly in Scottish heraldry than in English heraldry.  In English heraldry, some authors of books on heraldry think that's the way theoretically should have been in England, but as a matter of attested history, it's simply not the way that things actually worked in English heraldry for long periods of time.  This section of the article unfortunately appears to contain a lot of dubious facts and original research... AnonMoos (talk) 14:34, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: No reply after a week, so I'm removing the content based on the ostensible principle that "No two individuals can have the same coat of arms".  The truth is that this is not a universal principle -- it's in fact completely irrelevant to some national traditions (such as Polish heraldry), while it has been fairly strictly enforced in a few others (most conspicuously in Scotland).  England is an intermediate case -- in the special case of "Arms of sovereignty" (the national royal arms), displaying the undifferenced arms is equivalent to claiming to be the king or queen, so only the actual monarch can have the undifferenced arms, and other members of the royal family must have differenced arms.  However, below the level of the royal family, the alleged "No two individuals can have the same coat of arms" principle simply has not been consistently applied.  Some people have thought that it should be consistently applied, but the historical fact is that it hasn't been... AnonMoos (talk) 02:15, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: P.S. Differencing is sometimes used in English heraldry to distinguish the arms of sons from that of their father while the father is still alive, but such differencing marks are not usually hereditary.  Non-royal English heraldry conspicuously lacks the concatenated marks (a crescent on a mullet on a label or whatever) which would result from cumulative differencing of that type.  In the case of noblemen, the coat of arms  of the inheritor of the title would be differentiated from those of his younger brothers by the fact only the nobleman's had supporters... AnonMoos (talk) 02:40, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Problems with heraldry section of expanded article (law of arms / heraldry)