Talk:Flag of Singapore/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Elements and symbolism

Actually this flag looks like a beautiful compromise to me. Overall it looks like the Indonesian flag, but with the Malaysian Islamic Crescent Moon and the Stars. Furthermore the stars also reminds me of the Chinese People's Republic flag. Meursault2004 (talk) 10:48, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

"The crescent moon originally served as a symbol of assurance to the Malays in 1959 —the year the flag was designed— that Singapore was not a Chinese state." Shouldn't there be some mention of this? 203.117.143.129 (talk) 03:54, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Yes, but only if a proper reference can be found for it. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 00:39, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Peer review: useful?

With respect, is there really any point filing another peer review? My experience so far is that editors just run the article through some automated process which generates unhelpful comments. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 12:43, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Having a successful peer review, which receives plenty of useful feedback, entails considerable canvassing. For example, Homerun (film)'s ongoing peer review was filed less than six hours ago, but has already received two thorough reviews. I will contact relevant WikiProjects (and several of my IRC mates) to canvass for reviews. So should you. By the way, Jacklee, would you like to make Flag of Singapore the National Day main page FA? --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 13:35, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm afraid I don't have great enthusiasm for working much further on this article. Personally, I think the article is fine as it is, and disagree that any sections of it need revision. In my view, any further trimming of the article would be at the expense of losing relevant information. (I realize you disagree with me on this point, and you're of course entitled to do so.) In fact, what could be expanded upon is the use of other flags – perhaps that could be spun off into a separate article. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 14:07, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

I thought you would love to see your work featured on the Main Page, especially on National Day. If you are concerned about losing relevant information, consider moving most of it to Flag of Singapore usage guidelines (working title) and leaving a summary in Flag of Singapore. Readers who want detailed usage guidelines can read Flag of Singapore usage guidelines, while those who do not (the majority) will not be overwhelmed by the details. As a lawyer, you probably have no idea how scary legalese is to laypersons.
A couple of my IRC mates promised to review the article when they are free. In addition, I will try to rope in a copy-editor. Note that although I am capable of improving this article to GA status, getting it to FA status is probably beyond me.
--J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 15:15, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't think that the amount of information involved justifies creating a new article. There might be issues of notability of the information constituting an article in its own right. I feel the information is closely related to the content of the existing article and should stay there. Furthermore, it's not in legalese but in plain English. Also, as I'm trying to complete my PhD this year, it's unlikely that I'll have much time to contribute towards Wikipedia intensively, as compared to just dipping in here and there. All the best for trying to find a good reviewer! — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 15:37, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Compressing of the in general section is a must. Also, the gallery of other flags needs to be put into prose an a list of Singapore flags needs to be created. We cannot display all flags on this article, so we need to have this list. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 02:53, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Colonial flags?

Why is there not a section on the historical flags of Singapore? 218.186.12.218 (talk) 03:09, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Anyone? 218.186.13.1 (talk) 15:17, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
If you are interested in the subject, why not do some research on it and improve this article yourself? — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 18:51, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
I am not sure if there are any images on the Commons yet of these historical flags. I'll check. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 23:28, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
There seems to be quite a bit of information about historical Singapore flags at http://www.geocities.com/inescutcheon/FlagsMilitary.HTML. However, the website is not very well referenced so I don't know how accurate the information is. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 04:18, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Early Singapore Flags

Both of the following web pages reference an image of a Lion under a Coconut tree.

Also an image titled "The Historical & Economics Societies Combined Fancy Dress Social, at the Oei Fiong Ham Hall, Raffles College, October 25th, 1941" has 9 flags hoisted. (Black and white so I am guessing the flag based on features, left to right) This image is in Gretchen Liu's "Singapore - A Pictorial History - 1819 - 2000. (Maybe it is from the national library?)

  1. Blue? Ensign with shield.
  2. English
  3. Blue? Ensign
  4. Union Jack
  5. Irish Flag
  6. Blue? Ensign with white southern cross. (4 stars - similar NZ Flag)
  7. Another English Flag.
  8. Red? Ensign with white star inside a white circle and line segments radiating.
  9. Blue? Ensign with shield - again.

The shield does not appear to be the "Arms of the Colony of the Straits Settlements" - I am guessing it is Canadian, but it might be Singaporean. The "white star inside a white circle radiating" is beyond me.

Other then that all I could spot in the SG images were Union Jacks, some French Flags and Tao Nan School was flying a rather large flag with 5 horizontal stripes (next to the Union Jack)

NevilleDNZ (talk) 12:35, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm looking at the photograph on page 187 of the book, but it's really too small to be of much help. What's more, there's no caption indicating what the flags might be. (Also, I believe the flag in the centre is the Scottish, not the Irish, flag.) If you have access to the following article, it might be more useful: Whitney Smith (1966), "A History of the Symbols of Singapore", Flag Bulletin, 5 (2), Winchester, Mass.: Flag Research Center: 60–67. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 13:22, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

During Japanese occupation

There are suggestions that during the occupation a different Singapore flag was flown by the Japanese for Singapore.

  • Anyone know what this looked like?
  • Did the Singapore "resistance" have their own flag or emblem?

NevilleDNZ (talk)

Where are these suggestions from? The website http://www.geocities.com/inescutcheon/FlagsMilitary.HTML claims that the Rising Sun Flag was used during the Japanese Occupation. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 13:22, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Presidential Standard

Hi, Zscout370. Just noticed that our image of the Presidential Standard in the "Other flags of Singapore" section differs significantly in proportion to the one on the official website of the Istana Singapore (http://www.istana.gov.sg/CeremonyProtocol/index.htm) – in the latter flag, the crescent and stars are much smaller. What was your basis for the Commons image? Do you think you should create a new version of it? — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 05:16, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

I based my new drawing on the official flags I saw flying at the Istana, or from other locations. I also saw this flag used on stamps, where the crescent and the stars are a lot bigger. Even other SG vexillologists said the Istana graphic has the wrong size for the two elements. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 06:22, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

It's interesting that the flag on the Istana's website is actually inaccurate! Will have to see whether the correct flag is set out in any legislation or other official sources. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 10:22, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

The stamp I used was at [1] with Yusof Bin Ishak on the front. I know the ratio of the flag is correct, and the design of the crescent and stars is the same I used on other flags (the SG flag and the Red Ensign), I just need to know the size of the stars and crescent and also their position. I think they are dead center. I should really get myself to SG to figure this stuff out. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 15:52, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Well, of course you're welcome to visit :-) but that may not necessarily get you any closer to finding the answers you seek. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 18:11, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

I know what to ask, but the problem is who do I need to bother in order to get what I want. I know the National Library has construction sheets for various military flags and ensigns, but not certain about the national flag. I personally made up my own pattern, based off of the Red Ensign construction sheet and also images by the NHB. Now that I am on my laptop, the flags seem more natural at my end. The red actually looks dark, while on my home PC with an LCD screen, it looks pinkish. I might need to email the NHB to see if they got other ways they want the flag to be colored. (On a side note, they just told me the color specs for the Lion symbol; Pantone 032 for red, process white and black for, well, those two colors.) User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 20:00, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Former flag of Singapore

Why is the flag of Singapure on this site different than the one on ie flagsoftheword, photos here and photos elsewhere. It looks more like the flag of the governor of Singapure.

Why is the flag of Singapore when it used to be part of the Straits Settlements violative of WP:OR? Wasn't it based on a secondary source? — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 10:58, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

They called the secondary source not reliable. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 16:02, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

What was the secondary source you relied on? — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 16:30, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

I used FOTW to draw the image, since it had a closeup of the badge. I am hoping of some kind of archive from Singapore that has information about the badge and the ensign. The FAC also wants a better source for the ensign (white and blue) images and wants a ISBN number for the 2001 National Symbols Kit (I don't have the box anymore). User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 16:37, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

When I find some time I may be able to pop into the National University of Singapore Central Library. They seem to have a lot of the original legislation relating to the flags and ensigns. As regards footnote 55, why not refer directly to Singapore Naval Force Ensign (Misc. 1 of 1967) instead of to Felani's article at Flag of the World? — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 18:15, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

That is the thing I find strange, If I can be honest, this is the first time just stating where the images were drawn from was something anyone could challenge at FAC. This is something I pretty much need to focus on when I write other articles. I think the problem is that I still listed the laws on the image pages, but still told not good enough. I'll probably just remove the images for now until I can figure something out. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 06:29, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm looking at "Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Flag of Singapore". Is there really an objection concerning the reliability of the sources you have cited for the blue and white ensigns? Awadewit has expressed doubt about the reliability of relying on Flags of the World, since this seems to be a user-generated website, but if you cite the legislation laying down the specifications of the flags I can't see how that can be objected to. I grant that the legislation is offline, but the FA reviewers should assume good faith concerning those references. I should be able to verify them when I find some time to visit the NUS Central Library. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 09:59, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

I told the user about the law, but she still hasn't come back and said the laws were good enough (or not good). It won't be a permanent removal, but I just need to find out what is considered good or no go. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 21:51, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
I got an idea. Has information about the Straight Settlements flag. I will use that flag, along with this book, to show a source. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 08:39, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Yay! — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 11:04, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Use of Singapore Statute template

Hi, Zscout370. Why can't the {{Singapore Statute}} template be used in FACs? — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 17:41, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Because want publication information, even though it is obviously from the SG Government. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 19:35, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
You might want to check FAs that relate to, say, law to see if this is indeed the case. I had a look at "Fundamental Rights, Directive Principles and Fundamental Duties of India" and "Roe v. Wade", and noted that references are made to legislation without any mention of the fact that they are published by the Government of India or the United States Government. I do not see why Singapore statutes should be treated any differently. Statutes are generally not cited in the same way as books. In any case, even if you feel that it is useful to put in the imprint information (and I do not think it is, since this is not how statutes are generally cited), you can leave the template in place, like this: "{{Singapore Statute|title=Penal Code|cap=224|ed=2007}} (Singapore: Government of Singapore, 2007)". — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 05:09, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
Well, they wanted a publisher and the template does not provide it, so I had to change it. FAC has changed a lot recently, so just trying to give what the FAC folks want. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 05:19, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
Who's "they"? I don't see any discussion of the point at "Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Flag of Singapore/archive2". Adding imprint information is not the correct way to cite Singapore statutes – and I do not see why Singapore statutes should be treated differently from Indian or US statutes. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 06:38, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
See the comment about ref 18 and 19 having no publisher; that was specifically mentioning the laws and that template. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 06:53, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
I see – thanks for pointing that out. OK, I have raised the matter on the FAC discussion page. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 08:07, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Please make this the TFA on 9 August instead of 22 January!

9 August is the National Day of Singapore and the SGpedian community are working on a National Day Project that will see this article as the TFA, Singapore in Malaysia in OTD and 4 articles as DYKs, on 9 August 2010. Please change the date this article is featured on the Main Page, to enable our National Day Project to go as planned. --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 06:09, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

I left a note to Raul654 about this. I also agree that August 9th is a lot better than what is currently selected. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 06:14, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
He has just scheduled this article for 23 February. You will want to leave him another message if you would still prefer 9 August. -MBK004 02:57, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Merchant Flag

Can anyone confirm that the flag for merchant vessels prior to 1966 was the colonial flag, or was it a red ensign type flag based on the colonial flag? Mjroots (talk) 17:24, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

I can look. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 18:16, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Lead section and main page blurb

See also my criticism of the main page blurb. I am reproducing it here because everything I said about the blurb also applies to the lead.

The lead section uses the following “specialized terminology”:

  • “horizontal bicolour” – I can tell from the picture what this means. A blind person might not.
  • “placed in the canton” – it sounds like the horizontal bicolour of red above white is that which has been placed in the canton (assuming the reader knows what “canton” means).
  • “red charged in white” – without a picture, a reader not familiar with vexillology or heraldry cannot tell from context what this means.
  • “charged with” – is that like "charged in"?
  • “in the lower fly” – another phrase that most people will have to look up, assuming they have read this far.

I think I remember reading somewhere that it should be assumed that readers reading the lead section will not click any of the links, but I don't remember where.

I am sorry if this sounds harsh, but I can't think of any way to reword my criticisms.

68.109.117.85 (talk) 03:13, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Is this correct?
The design is a horizontal bicolour of red above white, placed in the canton by a white crescent moon....
I notice that the word "place" is linked to the heraldic word "charge". One could say "charged with a cresent moon"
but I have never heard the term "placed by....", and my Oxford dictionary gives a lot of uses for "place" as a verb, but not that one.
Is this the correct heraldic terminology? Or is it simply very badly written English?
If it is indeed the correct heraldic term, then all I can say is, using, in the context of wikipedia, simple words like "place" to mean something very different fom what they normally mean is ....well, let us just say it confuses issues. If you, the editors, know and understand your subject, then write as if you are writing for the front page of an encyclopedia widely used by the general public, rather than for the College of Arms.
Amandajm (talk) 03:46, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
I changed “placed” to “overlaid”. I am not a vexillologist, but I assume that is what was meant.
68.109.117.85 (talk) 04:35, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Usage of flags on boats and ships

Does anyone know if the restrictions on usage are correct? Normal courtesy practice for a boat visiting anoher country is to fly the other countrys national flag from the crosstrees of the mast above their own national flag. If Singaporeans are unable to fly their national flag on a boat or under another national flag are they thus doomed to rudeness or is an exemption made? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 157.203.255.2 (talk) 12:21, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes, the restrictions are correct: see [2] which appears in a footnote in the article. I do not know about this practice of ships flying a national flag when visiting foreign ports, but wouldn't it be observed by Singapore-registered ships flying the Red Ensign? I'm sure Singapore is not the only nation that uses a flag for its vessels other than the national flag. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 12:57, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
The local national flag flown by a merchant ship on entry to a foreign harbour is called a "courtesy flag" and it signifies that the ship flying it recognises the sovereignty of the nation who's port it is entering and that it will comply with local Customs and Health regulations by allowing Customs and Health inspections when requested, and that its crew will obey local laws and customs - with a small 'c' - while ashore.
While in a foreign port the ship remains the territory of the registering country, and so the ship's Master must give permission for the port authorities and Customs officials, etc., to come aboard as they have no legal authority or power to enter what is in-effect, foreign territory.
Failure to fly a courtesy flag when entering a harbour could be interpreted by the local port authorities as an unwillingness to co-operate with the port authorities, which in extreme cases, could lead to a diplomatic incident as boarding a foreign ship without the Master's permission can in some circumstances be construed by the ship's country of registry as a de jure Act of War.
Fortunately most failures to fly a courtesy flag are by yachtsmen and women and other small boat owners, many of whom are simply unaware of the purpose of flying the flag.
The above courtesy flag practice also used to be applied to airports and airliners although I believe it is much less common these days.

Sources modified on Flag of Singapore

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just attempted to maintain the sources on Flag of Singapore. I managed to add archive links to 9 sources, out of the total 9 I modified, whiling tagging 0 as dead.

Please take a moment to review my changes to verify that the change is accurate and correct. If it isn't, please modify it accordingly and if necessary tag that source with {{cbignore}} to keep Cyberbot from modifying it any further. Alternatively, you can also add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page's sources altogether. Let other users know that you have reviewed my edit by leaving a comment on this post.

Below, I have included a list of modifications I've made:


Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:18, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Flag of Singapore. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:58, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Flag of Singapore. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:25, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Flag of Singapore. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:22, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Flag of Singapore. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:55, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Flag_of_Singapore/Archive_2&oldid=1057520163"