Talk:Flag of Europe

(old comments)

Should we mention that the star formation is similar to a historical flag of the US?

This one: http://www.crwflags.com/art/hist/us13betsy.gif

Bogdan | Talk 20:31, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I removed the phrase 12 Stars & 12 States from the table. This is very misleading, suggesting that there's a relationship between the number of stars and the number of members (underlining and bold-facing it only strengthens that impression). But right above the table it clearly states there is no relationship - with a link to prove it. Abigail 12:56, Apr 28, 2004 (UTC)

>> Why is there no mention/discussion of the obvious question (of any American, anyway), which is the apparent copy/reference/homage of the original United States of America flag, in what many would imagine is original flag of the fledgling "United States of Europe"? True/false/both/neither as an answer seems to be needed since it stands out by its absence...to the point of wondering if there is some "wokeness" involved in not even addressing the question. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:861:8B80:6ED0:98EC:AAB9:33E8:592A (talk) 10:24, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

>>> after all, wikipedia pages are for people who are looking for the correct answer/information, not for people who already know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:861:8B80:6ED0:98EC:AAB9:33E8:592A (talk) 10:30, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

tenuous link with the HRE

The flag does bear a striking resemblance to that of the International Paneuropean Union, an organization led by Otto von Habsburg, the current head of the legendary Habsburg family--a family which produced at least 19 Holy Roman Emperors.

This looks like a pretty tenuous link to me. You might as well say "The flag is used by the European Parliament, which for twenty years counted among its members Otto von Habsburg, the current head of the legendary Habsburg family--a family which produced at least 19 Holy Roman Emperors." Marnanel 12:50, 29 Jul 2004 (UTC)

There is another problem with this -- I've not been able to the date when the International Paneuropean Union created its flag. Therefore I don't know which flag influenced the other. Saying just that there's "a similarity" between the flags is immature as it's an implication in favour of the conspiracy theory. That's just a factual complaint, which we may soon resolve by some further research.

Secondly we must learn to separate two different facts. One, it may be influenced or even directly derived from the International Paneuropean Union flag. Two, the conspiracy theories that lead to the connection between this organization and the Holy Roman Emperors. Since there are two separate bits of information, where the former connection may exist *without* the latter, we must mention them as two different bits of information, rather than predispose the reader infavour of the conspiracy theory by presenting them as a single item.

I'm gonna rewrite the sentence given the above problems I believe exist. Aris Katsaris 19:53, 29 Jul 2004 (UTC)

christianity and conspiracies/myths

Actually it is not a myth:

"The European flag of 12 yellow stars on a blue background also owes something to Catholicism. Arsene Heitz, who designed it in 1955, recently told Lourdes magazine that his inspiration had been the reference in the Book of Revelation, the New Testament's final section, to “a woman clothed with the sun...and a crown of twelve stars on her head." (The Economist, October 28, 2004) [1]

Maybe we should rewrite that section. Bogdan | Talk 20:53, 30 Oct 2004 (UTC)

It should be Christianity, not just Catholicism. --Error 01:54, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Why? 71.241.83.232 (talk) 18:59, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Is it worth noting that there's a distinction between the meaning attributed to the flag by the designer, and any 'official' meaning? 203.221.18.161 12:48, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Just so you know, it's the Crown of Immortality you're talking about. - Roberth Edberg 15:45, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Who gives a damn. Twelve stars on a blue background who cares, religion takes everything as insult or references to them. I think that for once a coincidence has occurred and it should just be accepted myths and legends are to be ignored because they are false.--Lucy-marie 12:59, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Too great of a coincidence, especially in light of the continent's history.

71.241.83.232 (talk) 18:58, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Green E

Does somebody remember a flag consisting mainly of a big green E? --Error 01:54, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)

No, but you've made me think of the slightly comical jubilea simbolo which is the closest thing I know of to what you describe. — Trilobite (Talk) 04:59, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

It's the flag of the European movement. -- Joolz 17:54, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Here are available some additional information about the former flag of the European Movement

http://www.fotw.net/flags/eu%7Dmov.html#for 8 July 2011 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.168.2.153 (talk) 14:21, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Upside Down Flag

The flag is symmetrical, isn't it ? Is there really an upside down version that is incorrect ? Parmaestro 05:44, 13 May 2005 (UTC)

I had the same question until I looked at a larger image of the flag. when you turn the entire flag over, the stars are all upside down. I tried to clarify the original note 'This flag is upside-down.' by adding ', or the individual stars are,'. If you now understand what I'm saying, do you have any suggestions for improving the text? -- Ec5618 09:57, May 13, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks so much. I should have looked more closely. Stars rotated incorrectly, two at the top instead of two at the bottom, perhaps ? Parmaestro 10:33, 13 May 2005 (UTC)

Yes, the stars shoulds have one point sticking straight up, and two pointing downward.

'This flag is upside-down, or the individual stars are. Each star should have a single point pointing up.' -- Ec5618 10:59, May 13, 2005 (UTC)

Vandalised image

I've removed the image of the flag from this and other pages today as a vandalised version has been uploaded. Hopefully this can be restored soon but I don't have the facility to do this at the moment! Wombat 14:55, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

.

I feel bad about seeing mangled version of the flag. A paragraph of plain text could replace them.124.192.21.43 (talk) 14:54, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

• 
  This flag is, or the individual stars are, upside-down.
• 
  The stars are rotated incorrectly. All the stars should be rotated the same i.e. with two points at the bottom and one at the top.
• 
  The stars are in the wrong positions; they should be in the "O'Clock" positions.

Page title

I have an objection to the page title, as this is not the flag of Europe (which, like most other continents, has no flag), but the flag of the European Union. The European Union does not include all the countries of Europe. Therefore, the title should be changed. Jon Harald Søby 16:28, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

I thought that too, but then I found that the article itself says otherwise:

Although the flag is most commonly associated with the European Union (EU), it was initially used by the Council of Europe (COE), and intended to represent Europe as a whole as opposed to any particular organization such as the EU or the COE.

The flag was originally adopted by the Council of Europe on 8 December 1955, from a suggested design by the Chief Herald of Ireland. The Council of Europe from the beginning desired it to be used by other regional organizations seeking European integration. The European Community (EC) adopted it on 26 May 1986. The European Union, which was established by the Maastricht Treaty in 1992 to replace the EC and encompass its functions, also adopted the flag. Since then the use of the flag has been controlled jointly by both the Council of Europe and the European Union.

Wombat 09:26, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

Interesting. Didn't see that coming, lol. Still, it may have been designed as a flag for Europe, but today it is not associated with Europe as a whole, but with the European Union; citizens in non-EU European countries like Norway (where I'm from), Switzerland and Iceland don't feel that the flag regard them.

So, would there be any objections to this page being moved to "Flag of the European Union"? Jon Harald Søby \ ^{no na} 15:21, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

Well, I take your point: many people in countries that are European but aren't EU members don't feel the flag applies to them. But still, strictly speaking, the flag does apply to them. So I'm not sure we should rename the article just because many people would mistakenly think it should be renamed, if you see what I mean. Perhaps it's better, instead, to keep the current title but then add a paragraph making this point in the article itself? What do you think? Wombat 18:05, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

Yes, I suppose that's the best way to do it. =) Jon Harald Søby \ ^{no na} 20:44, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

Maybe the page for Flag of the United States should be renamed American Flag? 203.221.18.161 12:48, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

One way to avoid the whole controversy: use the generally accepted usage of the name "European flag". 124.192.21.43 (talk) 14:52, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

I agree. It really should not be called the Flag of Europe, but rather the Flag of the European Union. It is not commonly accepted to represent Europe as a whole, no matter what the creators themselves have chosen to name it. 90.228.193.5 (talk) 21:01, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

December 2016 discussion

The title of page is kinda misleading, because the flag only has official use within the EU, if people at a rally in Canada start waving the American flag for whatever reason! that dose not make the flag a symbol of Canada. I know that there has been a talk about this, but nothing seems to changs. A common argument is that many people in non EU states see their future in EU, okay! that does not mean the flag symbolizes the continent, do you get what i mean? funny thing is that the "African Union" covers more of Africa than EU dose in Europe, but still the page about the "AU flag" wait for it,,,,,,,,, guess what? it's called "Flag of the African Union" not the "Flag of Africa" or "African flag" Can you see the double standard here??. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.144.126.211 (talk) 10:14, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Not really comparable. The flag of Europe was created as a flag representing the whole of Europe and agreed upon by the member states of the Council of Europe—a Europe-wide body. Later the EEC adopted this symbol, along with the anthem of Europe, as a European body. The flag is still officially recognised by the Council of Europe as the flag of Europe. Greanted, there is a misconception that is it only the flag of the EU, but why should Wikipedia help to exacerbate this misconception? Surely we should convey accurate information? Neither the Council of Europe or the EU refer to the flag as the "flag of the EU". Rob984 (talk) 11:52, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Okay, going by your logic at least one of these two institutions should cover the whole continent for this to make sense, but they don't. The Vatican, Belarus and Kosovo are not in these two organizations!, Just like with the US, everybody knows that it's wrong to call the flag in wikipedia, "Flag of America or American flag" even though the people in the US always call it that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.144.126.211 (talk) 08:59, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

Well, regardless, the Council of Europe aims to represent Europe and the Flag of Europe was agreed upon by all member states' governments, and thus by representatives of the vast majority of the European population. The flag of the African Union is precisely that, a flag representing an organisation. The flag of Europe represents the people of Europe and is used by the people of Europe, inside and outside of the EU. The symbol itself is used far more broadly then just to represent the EU. Is the flag of the African Union? You're making a straw man argument. The flag is used to represent Europe as a whole and you have not at all refute that argument. Instead you are drawing meaningless comparisons. Rob984 (talk) 09:21, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

But the thing that you seem to be avoiding is something that i should have defined more in my earlier comment, the that is that the Council of Europe and EU are different things. despite a deep connection, the Council of Europe is just an organisation where non EU members don't use the flag, wild at the same time the EU is so much more and tries it best to be as close to being a country without actually being one, where member states use the flag at many events in and outside of Europe. plus that the continent itself is not some institution where countries can have a majority say over other countries without their consent. that's probably why the Council of Europe and EU have the same flag/Anthem, so the EU/flag creators can push this ownership over the continent without having it, just by calling it a Europein flag instead of the "flag of the Council of Europe and EU". It probably simplifies a lot just calling it the "flag of Europe" for you and others, but thats simply just wrong just like the case with the US. 194.144.126.211 (talk) 13:47 31 December 2016 (UTC)

The flag has been used to represent people from the entirety of Europe. In sports for instance. Competitions like the Ryder Cup and the Mosconi Cup feature an European team wich can consist of players of all of Europe who then all compete under this flag.Tvx1 06:24, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Designer

So are we going with Gerard Slevin, or Arsene Heitz, or a committee of the Council of Europe arguing about numbers of stars --Henrygb 23:35, 3 September 2005 (UTC)?

Slevin's input is disputed. See rec.heraldry discussion.

It can now be confirmed that the claim that Irish Chief Herald Chief Slevin designed the European Flag is untrue. Slevin played a role in the process of selecting a design, but it was a relatively late and minor one. See sourced account at http://homepage.eircom.net/~seanjmurphy/chiefs/euroflagmemo.html Sean Murphy, 10 December 2005

Which role played Arthur Eisenmenger? His Wikipedia page (also the German version) and at least one trustable external source claim that he has designed the flag. We should go for consistency here. – Torsten Bronger 08:23, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I have heard of Eisenmenger as the designer, along with the Euro currency sign.--Gloriamarie 04:42, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Koolhaas Proposal

The linked BBC article is highly misleading, to say the least. The Commission never asked Koolhass to design a new flag, they never considered to make this barcode label proposal the official EU flag, and they couldn't simply change the flag at whim even if they wanted. Sentences like "EU officials are currently examining the design, which if approved could soon be flying from flagpoles across the continent." are simply wrong. One should remove the link or better add a remark in the paragraph about this flag.

Not the right colours on 15-star flag and 8-ring flag

The picture of 15-star flag proposal of 1953 is not correct. It shows a light blue field. The picture on the official proposal is dark blue: Emblem adopted by the Consultative Assembly of the Council of Europe in 1953 I think that the confusion comes from the text of the proposal : "Sur le fond bleu du ciel...", meaning "On the blue background of the sky...". But that does not meaning that the colour was sky blue. There is no ambiguity with the associated picture. --2A01:E0A:AB7:FA80:B956:3321:8A64:1703 (talk) 12:01, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

The picture for the "eight rings" proposal is also completely wrong. This flag was not light blue with white rings, but dark blue with golden rings, as indicated in this link, p.25 : ‘The European Flag’ by Robert Bichet (1985) "sur fond d'azur, un cercle de huit anneaux d'or...", meaning "on an azure field, a circle of eight rings of gold..." In the same source, the author (p.31) explain that in heraldry, azure corresponds to an "ultramarine blue". --2A01:E0A:AB7:FA80:B956:3321:8A64:1703 (talk) 15:01, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

About the twelve stars

Sorry, I don't know if I made comment the right way, hope so. I read "a myth" tells italian representive opposed to increase the number of stars to 13 as that is an unlucky number. I think this is not a myth but a hoax, as, in Italy, 13 is a lucky number, as the unlucky one is 17. I think that must be removed, if you agree.

The Crown of Immortality has twelve stars. - Roberth Edberg 15:41, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Living between Ireland and Britain 1972-1975 there was definitely a 15 star flag in use in those countries (to also represent the 3 additional countries Ireland, UK, Denmark): whether unofficially, to placate the countries' populations in terms of recognizing them in the flag everyone assumed had 1 star per country, or not. I find no mention of this in the Wiki entry, which surprises me. Perhaps if an official Wiki editor can get corroboration of what I said, this can be included in the Wiki itself. Peter Dougal, Dublin, Ireland 20th March 2007

That seems unlikely. In 1973 the EEC went from six to nine members, and anyway it was not using the flag at the time. The only time it might have gone to 15 was when Austria, Finland and Sweden joined in the 1990s, and it didn't --Rumping (talk) 10:10, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

This issue of the 15 star rumour has since been clarified in the article, see the section on the number of stars and creation. Beyond the first proposal, there has never been any official use of a 15 star flag. It was proposed early when the Council of Europe was designing it but the issue of whether or not to include the Saarland caused dispute over the exact number so a neutral number of twelve was chosen as it is symbolic for unity and perfection (apparently). The EEC adopted the flag as the Council of Europes base 12 star version and has not altered it in any way. If anyone has seen a 15 star flag flying, or any flag with any number except 12, the creator/flyer either got the number wrong (deliberately or accidentally), the viewer was mistaken due to the distance the flag was viewed at or it just wasn't the European flag (The ECSC flag's stars changed according to members until 1986).- _J.Logan`^t: 16:00, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

European flag

The change in title from European Flag to Western European Flag (as of 15th July by Nixer) I think is wrong, it is a flag to represent the whole of Europe regardless of which area it was designed in. The EU is clearly not just Western Europe, with Finland, Estonia and Cyprus being members, much of south east Europe joining (but not several Western nations) and it being used by countries and peoples with EU ambitions, such as by the Georgian President or the pro-democracy protestors in Belarus. In addition as it is the Council of Europe's flag first and currently the only European country not connected to it officialy is Belarus. And by saying it came from the west is no excuse for calling it the Western European flag, or should we call the US flag the Eastern US flag? This is the EUROPEAN flag, and limiting it to Western Europe in the title is an insulting.

--88.105.157.78

This flag does not represent the whole Europe, so the article name is incorrect. Maybe we should consider page move.--Nixer 04:59, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

As the article says, the flag is intended to represent Europe as a whole. And it's the flag of the Council of Europe, whose members include almost every European country, from Portugal to Russia. In any case, it's called the European flag, and it's not for Wikipedia to start making up new names. --Zundark 07:34, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

And why would be the Flag of the European Union incorrect? --Irpen 07:42, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Council of Europe is a political entity, not only geographic. Not only Belarus, but also Kazakhstan (which partially located in Europe) is not member of the Council of Europe, as well as Vatican City. Council of Europe not only requires the country to be European, but also pro-Western. From historical perspective we can see that during the Cold War the flag was used only in Western Europe. In fact, now the flag is used by two unrelated bodies: the EU and the Council of Europe. So I think moving to Flag of the European Union would be appropriate with a redirect from Flag of Council of Europe. By the way, I think calling the African Union's flag "Flag of Africa" is also incorrect.--Nixer 08:09, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

It is not the job of Wikipedia to set the correct name here. It must simply report what name for the flag is actually used. Here is the official europa.eu website which calls the flag the European flag [2].

I think declaring by the 13 Western European countries comprising about 15% of European territory and about 25% of its population the flag of their union as "Flag of Europe" is a Cold War trick. How would you consider if some 10 countries now declare that the flag of their union is the "Flag of Humanity" or the "Flag of the Earth"?--Nixer 08:46, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Our feelings and considerations are irrelevant. Wikipedia must report facts, whether we like them or not. If you want to add a "criticism" section to the current article, backed up by references of course, which lists valid objections to the use of the "European flag" name, feel free to do so. Balcer 08:54, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Anyway, with the expansion coming in January 2007 about 70% of Europe's population will live in the EU, so calling the flag European flag will not be that inaccurate. Balcer 08:38, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

About 50% of European territory is located in Russia and Russia will never become a EU member. And did you ever seen the Flag of African Union to be called "Flag of Africa"? Note that in the African Union lives more than 90% of African population.--Nixer 08:46, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, if the African Union starts to use the name "Flag of Africa" as the official name, Wikipedia would need to have an article under that name. Anyway, if you don't like the name "European flag", please start some kind of political or protest campaign to get the European Union to change the name. But remember that Wikipedia must reflect the world as it is and not as it should be, so it is not a proper place for such a campaign. Balcer 09:05, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Ok. Will you support creation of Flag of Earth article if I design such flag for Humanity in my kitchen and promote it in "Metro" newspaper or something else? Of course, you should not create "criticism" section because you have not sourced objections (of course until you institute a political movement against such initiative).--Nixer 09:43, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

If your new flag really becomes notable, according to Wikipedia notability standards, I will support a Wikipedia article about it! Good luck on your project! Balcer 09:59, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Ok, but will you support an article, which seriously says it is the Flag of Earth? I dont object the article about the flag of EU, but if it is moved to or called in the article "Proposed flag of Europe" I will be satisfied.--Nixer 10:10, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

"Proposed flag of Europe"? That name makes no sense to me at all. As for "Flag of Earth", I would have no objection in principle to have an article under that title. Of course, if that flag is not actually the flag of Earth but just some notable symbol someone made up, then the article would explain that. Balcer 10:18, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

It may be the flag of political institutions but it is widely seen by people in and outside of those institution to mean Europe as a whole and it's unification, and although three states are outside, one is mainly Asian, one is tiny and can barely be called a state and the other hardly makes up much of the European population. Just because the two main organisations which use the symbol have Human Rights standards doesn't mean it can't apply to them, or will cease to apply upon their objection. Would we rename the Polish flag because the Mayor of Krakow complained no one asked them about it?

In addition, the term "Europe" is increasingly taken as the European Union, in the same way "America" is said with the meaning of the United States of America. Should we stop people referring to their flag as the American flag because Brazil isn't part of the US?

We never refer in Wikipedia to Flag of the United States of America as "Flag of America" or "Frag of America as whole" or even "Flag of North America". There was a procedure of acception of Polish flag as a consequence of nation-wide elections, but the COU flag was declared as flag of the entire continent by countries comprising tiny part of it. And if not the end of Cold War and dessolution of the USSR this flag would known as "European" only in tiny number of countries. In fact it is politically charged symblol, not a geographically defined emblem.--Nixer 16:42, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

A section disputing the validity of it's name would be fine but I agree with the above, it is called the flag of Europe by the world and it should be called by that here. As for African and Earth flags, well I wouldn't be surprised if in time it is called the "African Flag" as it and their union gains more notoriety. Seams to me if you object to the term "European" in the flag you ought to object to the term "European" in the European Union.

How about the Flag of Antarctica (not to mention Flag of Mars) should those be moved to Proposed flag of ...

That article starts with "There is no official flag of Antarctica". May be we should start this article in the same manner?--Nixer 17:08, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

I do not understand why Nixer has the idea that a flag must be adopted legally before it becomes the flag of a country. Although no law has ever been passed making the Union Flag (in any of its versions) the official flag of the United Kingdom, nobody seems to be claiming that it isn't. Nor has there been any law naming it the "Union Flag." From the argument above, I take it that Nixer would recommend that the world should now refer to it as "the proposed flag of the UK." What a mouthful! --Specul8 16:04, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

technically I believe the flag currently (or at least until very recently) had the same status as the flag of a private corporation. It has/had no official legal recognition and therefore should not be flown in place of the union flag or the individual flag of each nation (cross of st george etc). 130.246.132.26 16:18, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

The article title is inconsistent with the naming of other flag-related pages, which all start with "Flag of". The article should be moved to "Flag of Europe". - LeonWhite 03:18, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Because it is not flag of Europe. Since the Council of Europe changed the flag, this flag represents only about half of Europe (by territory). "European" is its name probably.--Nixer 19:35, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Is there an official interpretation of the colours of the flag? Is it "blue and yellow" or "blue and gold"?

The Council of Europe define the colours as Pantone Relfex Blue and Pantone Yellow see here http://www.coe.int/T/E/Com/About_Coe/flag_guide.asp#TopOfPage. Please remember to sign your comments. --Brideshead 17:55, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but it's absolutely unacceptable to call this the "European Flag". Europe is a continent, not a country or organisation. The EU consistently hijack the name of the continent to refer to themselves. The European Parliament is not in fact the Parliament of Europe at all, but the Parliament of the EU. It is a con trick so that anyone who criticises the EU can then be branded as "being against membership of Europe" or "not liking Europe", putting forward the bizaare notion that anyone against the EU or EU membership somehow wants their country to be dug up and moved somewhere else in the world. To say that this is the "European Flag" is factually untrue and completely misleading; it is like having an article North American Flag or something. Are Norway and Switzerland not in Europe perhaps because they are not members of the EU? As to "oh, well, the EU call it the European Flag so it must be true" - it reminds me of Abraham Lincoln's famous riddle: "How many legs does a dog have, if you call the tail a leg?", the answer of course being four - calling a tail a leg doesn’t make it one. The EU can call this the European Flag, the World Flag, the Intergalactic Flag if they wish - it doesn't make it true, and surely at Wikipedia we deal in facts, not political posturing? ^Tom_Phil 18:13, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

I wouldn't be so sure that European Union is the same as the Continent Europe. The European Union is a Union based on Values, which does not have to be related to the Continent. In fact take a lock in my Sandbox User:Roberth_Edberg/Sandbox were I'm doing some job trying to find out what and were Europe came from. From that perspective, of course a flag can be related to the European Union. It's not the same thing as beeing a flag for the continent of Europe. --Roberth Edberg 19:11, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

27 member proposal

Where has this image come from? Is there a source that this is a serious proposal considered by the European Council and not just someone playing with CorelDraw? The council have made it clear that there are no plans to change the flag, the 12 stars have no relation to number of states, why would a change be needed now at the 5th enlargement? In addition the stars used are the wrong type. If this can't be properly sourced to an official European proposed change, I think it should be removed as misleading. --Brideshead 17:50, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree. I haven't been able to find any proposal for this flag, so I'm commenting it out, so the uploader has the opportunity to find a supporting basis for it. -- Arwel (talk) 20:26, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

It was added by Wkobylinski, and when he added it the first time, he attributed it to one Wiktor Kobyliński (presumably himself). He has uploaded eight different images of it. --Zundark 08:39, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Ah yes, I see. It's plainly Original Research, then, so away it goes. -- Arwel (talk) 08:08, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

There are similairities with the Crown of Immortality. Roberth Edberg 15:39, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Number of stars on the EEC - EU flag

Living between Ireland and Britain 1972-1975 there was definitely a 15 star flag in use in those countries (to also represent the 3 additional countries Ireland, UK, Denmark): whether unofficially, to placate the countries' populations in terms of recognizing them in the flag everyone assumed had 1 star per country, or not. I find no mention of this in the Wiki entry, which surprises me. Perhaps if an official Wiki editor can get corroboration of what I said, this can be included in the Wiki itself. Peter Dougal, Dublin, Ireland

I don't remember a 15-star flag - anyway, between 1973 and 1981 there were only nine members in the EEC anyway. -- Arwel (talk) 19:29, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Flag is upside down, isn't it?

The flag in the "Number of stars" section is upside down despite the section below warning people about showing it the wrong way. This needs to be addressed. 207.203.80.14 00:22, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Flag specification not complete

The diagram for the flag specification is not quite complete - it doesn't list the colour numbers (eg Pantone ) of the blue and gold. --Ozhiker 14:53, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Move

I think this article should be moved to Flag of Europe, since most flag articles begin with "Flag of". A•N•N•A hi! 20:54, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

the flag will desappear

After the next summitt of Bruxells, Angela Merkel, who is chairing the EU talks, said the new treaty that will replace a draft constitution rejected by French and Dutch voters in 2005, would not include state-like symbols to avoid public fears of a European super state.

So the flag will desappear

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

--Alessandro.pasi 19:14, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

It doesn't mean that it will disappear, but simply that it is not "official". It will continue to be used as an official flag, however. It's just not backed by a treaty. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.62.82.91 (talk) 14:48, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

change reference link | Regex dash fixer

The link stating that Arsène Heitz is the designer of the flag is restricted: "This article is premium content. In order to gain access to it please either Log in, Activate your complimentary web account if you are a print subscriber, or Subscribe now". I suggest an alternate page, like this (the first result in a google search for "Arsène Heitz" in english — maybe other results are more appropriate). I know it's less reliable, but at least it can be read! Waldir 19:15, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Images

Is anyone able to provide a free version of the proposed barcode flag? Also, of an unofficial civil ensign? Also, anyone have more data on the latter beyond the link I just put up? - J Logan ^t: 16:53, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Peer review

I'd like to see this get to GA status, aside from the title needing to be sorted, does anyone see problems in this article? - J Logan ^t: 15:58, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Flag in space

Information on the first EU flag flow in space - on the ISS - but where on earth - or space - to put it in the article?

• "This European Union flag was flown on board the ISS during ESA astronaut Andre Kuipers' Delta Soyuz mission, April 2004." (last image)

- J Logan ^t: 16:23, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Kazakhstan

Kazakhstan is not in Europe —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.9.11.194 (talk) 23:39, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Actually, part of Kazakhstan is in Europe, although you are correct in that much of it is not… see Kazakhstan. ~XarBioGeek (talk) 23:49, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Title of the page

Commons: Discussion on file name here —Preceding unsigned comment added by JLogan (talk • contribs) 20:10, August 25, 2007 (UTC)

I changed it from European flag to Flag of Europe as that is the format followed by all other flags, without changing its scope. However I do still have a problem with it. For us to call it the European flag or Flag of Europe I think it does need something more official than the word and spread of the Council. Also, in places outside the EU, it seems to be used more in reference to the EU than Europe as a whole, to western aspirations and of a desire to join the EU. Even if it is seen as a symbol of Europe, I don't think it is widespread and common enough for us to use that name, it is nearly always in connection to the EU.

Of course we would then have the problem of which name;

• Flag of the Council of Europe and the European Union
• Flag of the European Union and the Council of Europe
• Flag of the European Union
• Flag of the Council of Europe

The first two are a tad long and we can argue about which comes first, importance or first adopted. So I think we could deviate from official names to what is commonly called (this under WP guidelines) and just call it the Flag of the European Union. It may have adopted it second but it is the body most associated with it. That's what most people would call it and it uses it most. Indeed the Council of Europe have a defaced version that they use, so they have their own variant different from the norm used by the EU. Seems to me like the logical way to go. Thoughts? - J Logan ^t: 10:00, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Mh, yeah. It most certainly is used to refer almost exclusively to the EU (in other contexts, it may sometimes be used to represent Europe as a whole, but that's FAR less often; make a note of it in the article, though), and the CoE has its own version of the flag which it uses. I agree with you entirely. —Nightstallion 15:03, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

The 'stylised' green-e-flag is only a logo, and the main symbol of the council is still the normal flag.

What we have to make clear, is wether this flag should be placed next to the word 'Europe' in wikipedia. If we move this page to 'Flag of the EU', you have to realise that this flag won't be used to represent the Europe-release of video games and movies in infoboxes. We'll see the U.S. flag and releasedate above, and the letters 'EUR' and the European date below. Some editors are very "aware" of the difference between 'Europe' and the 'European Union'. Practically, we'll cut all bonds between Europe as a whole and this flag if we rename this page. Wikipedia tells people what to believe. - S. Solberg J. 20:39, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

No matter what we conclude, this flag has multiple roles. I think 'Flag of Europe' is the best solution. In my opinion, to call it only the flag of the EU would be too oversimplified and de facto. And very inconvenient for the many other roles this flag in fact serves for Europe in Wikipedia.

When all of Europe is united, the flag is legally adopted and the Council of Europe history we should rename this page. - S. Solberg J. 20:57, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Not all of Europe is united and maybe never will. There's a bunch of countries neither a member of the EU nor of the Council of Europe, e.g. Belarus, Kazakhstan and the Vatican City and neither of them has even the possibilities to enter the EU sometime in the future. On the other hand, the Council of Europe has member states which are not part of Europe, depending on the dëfinitions you use, Russia, Georgia, Turkey, Aserbaidjan. --Matthiasb-DE 11:26, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough, I'll leave it. I don't like the idea of using other editors ideas as reasoning for the title of an article but Flag of Europe works well enough right now. However I think we ought to do more to expand comments on wider use, I've tried putting in a bit more there but am lacking resources. There are two images on Commons showing the flag used by protestors in Belarus but it is too small to be seen in a thumbnail (I've categoried them under the EU flag if you want to see). Anyone have data though? Use in Ukraine maybe? - J Logan ^t: 07:45, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

• No. There is no Flag of Europe. Europe is a continent. As also no Flag of America or Flag of Asia seem to exist. Hence, Flag of Europe is a bad name. European flag was correct, since it is both the flag of European Union as well as Council of Europe. It should be moved back. --Matthiasb-DE 11:17, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Em... it means the same thing. It is just a different order of words. European flag and Flag of Europe - what changes? We have Flag of Antartica despite no formal adoption - this has more grounding that that. And there is no Flag of Asia because there is no organisation such as the CoE or EU who has developed one. - J Logan ^t: 12:21, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

There is no state of Europe. There's a European Council and a European Union. Neither of them is a state. Neither of them represents Europe as a hole. Europe is a continent. --Matthiasb-DE 11:40, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Actually its a peninsular to be technical. And its the Council of Europe, European Council is something different. But same point I made above, Antartica isn't a state. And I'm not quite sure what you're point is exactly, this is the standard naming convention. - J Logan ^t: 15:07, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

The point is: e.g. Andorra is not in European Union, Iceland is not, Serbia is not, Montenegro is not, Ukraine is not, FYROM is not, Switzerland is not and so on - none of these countries has the right to make officially use of the flag which in WP is now named "Flag of Europe". It does not make matter that some (not all!) of these countries are members of the European council, which is only a gremium in Strasburg and not to errored with the European Union. Membership in the European Council does not give the member states the right to use its flag. Official use consists by two circumstances: it represents the European Council (as an institution, not its members!) and the member states of the EU as a whole (not a simple one). Non-EU members have no right to use that flag. Hence, the name given is wrong. Similar would be to name the Flag of the United States in future Flag of the Americas. Exactly that has be done with "Flag of Europe". That's the point I consider as - badly - wrong. --Matthiasb-DE 19:38, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

BTW: European flag is ill-fately wrong as well. It's "Flag of European Union" and "Flag of European Council" and therefore there should be two different flag files at Commons, even they appear exactly the same. However, Commons says it keeps it as one flag, since in the EN:WP the article combines both flags. What comes next? Putting together the Flag of Monaco with the Flag of Indonesia? --Matthiasb-DE 19:46, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Okay, first it is Council of Europe, European Council is different. Second, the flag belongs to the Council of Europe - it created it and holds the rights to it, not the EU. Hence that is why the likes of Georgia use it even though they are not in the EU. Plus on your not all, there are only three states with territory in Europe who are not in the Council, and one is an observer. Back to the point though, your comments on "has no right to use the flag" are meaningless, there is no "right" in such a respect and as I have said above the flag belongs to the Council, not the Union. Andorra has perfect right to use it. And you comment on it representing the Council not its members, same can be said for the EU. The flag would represent the EU and its institutions, rather than representing Britian. It is just perspective. I haven't a clue what you're getting at with Flag of the United States/Americas - there is nothing on the US flag being for the whole of the Americas and you still haven't responded to the Antartica point which just shows the convention in action. Further more, your point on having flag of the European Union or Flag of the Council really wouldn't work as a title, it would require two seperate pages for the same flag. Anyhow, considering the above errors I suggest you read into the topic first.- J Logan ^t: 20:25, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorry: you claim that Georgia or Andorra have the right to use that flag? Where's your source for that claim? Even the article itself does not claim that. Please tell your source. And yes, it needs two pages for the flag of different bodies, even if they appear even. As I said: We don't have a page Flag of Monaco and Indonesia. --Matthiasb-DE 07:42, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

What's your source! I've already stated (as the article does) that the flag belongs to the Council, not the Union. Therefore how can there Andorra not have the "right" to use the flag! They're a member of the Council who owns the flag. Further more, on your point on Monaco and Indonesia, they are just the same design, the European flag uses is the same flag with the same history, the same symbolism, the same ideas - it is the same flag used by two different organisations. You can't compare that to two similar designs.- J Logan ^t: 14:09, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Per Wikipedia:Verifiability: Where it is written that Andorra can use the flag? -- As I said before, I don't like the formulation Flag of Europe which is IMO wrong. See, in German it's Europaflagge and not Flagge Europas, in French it's Drapeau européen not Drapeau de l'Europe, in many versions language (I looked up IT, ES, CS) it's localized as Flag of the European Union, not as Flag of Europe. EN:WP is the only major (european) language version using the construction Flag of Europe. The flag can be the European Flag, it can be the Flag of European Union and Flag of the Council of Europe but it cannot be the Flag of Europe. Europe is, as I stated before, no state and (pitifully) no state union as a whole but only (maybe) a geographical unity (and there are enough out in the wild doubting even that for geological reasons but that is not the theme here). --Matthiasb-DE 15:33, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Protected

I noticed on my watchlist that this page has been shuffled back and forth between titles over the past 24 hours. I've protected the article until the dispute is resolved.

Now, I'll take off my administrator hat and comment on this dispute from my editorial side. I would like to note that the flag is referred to as the "European flag" by both the European Union and the Council of Europe. Since Wikipedia is descriptive not proscriptive, we should probably abide by the name used by the organizations by which it is most commonly used. I agree that "Flag of Europe" is a bit official-sounding and thus somewhat misleading, but calling it "Flag of the European Union and the Council of Europe" is unwieldy and, to be frank, sounds a little stupid. "Flag of Europe" can redirect to Flags of Europe, and we can put one of those nifty "Flag of Europe redirects here. For the flag used by many Europe-wide organizations, please see European flag". I hope that it serves as an acceptable compromise, especially given the zero-sum alternatives. --Hemlock Martinis (talk) 21:52, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Firstly, I think it is a bit pointless to redirect flag of europe to flags of europe, just redirect it to European flag. Secondly, Flag of Europe is following the naming conventions, no other page does it the other way around. Third, Europe isn't a state but neither is Antarctica, which uses Flag of Antarctica. Saying "Flag of" does not mean something is a state, it is over compensation for something that isn't there. Fourth, the full name is very unwieldy as you say, something else is best found. Fifth, it is just the name of the page for simplicity sake, the name of the infobox and immediately after the title in the intro states its true nature so anyone looking at this can not be misled. Finally, considering how many discussions we've had a unilateral change would not be welcome.- J Logan ^t: 10:14, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

European flag and Flag of Europe do not mean the same thing. The Union Flag of the UK and the Tricolore of France, for example, are both European flags as they are flags of European countries, but neither of them is a Flag of Europe. Opera hat (talk) 11:13, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

(please keep discussion down here)

Neither were intended as a flag of Europe, they use neither the name not the intent to represent the whole. This does.- J Logan ^t: 16:45, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

I entirely agree with JLogan. It should be Flag of Europe. —Nightstallion 19:33, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

The settled status quo was Flag of Europe, and the title of the article should have been that when it was protected. - SSJ ☎ 20:58, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

As there has been little added discussion, the status quo was "Flag of Europe", I'd say we should move it back there. I could also live with "European flag", but that sounds a bit strange to me. —Nightstallion 08:27, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

I agree, moving it back to "Flag of Europe". --Hemlock Martinis (talk) 17:33, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. Hopefully we won't have to keep protecting this page because of the problematic title. If anyone wishes to change it in future, please gain a consensus first.- J Logan ^t: 17:54, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

User:Gennarous has put it back to his title again despite the consensus here, or even responding to the consensus here. Given the total disregard for the nature of Wikipedia, can we do something about the user?- J Logan ^t: 17:13, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

We got move-protection indefinitely for this article on WP:RFP. I requested the same thing for Anthem of Europe and Symbols of Europe, but Anthem of Europe will only be move-protected for 5 days due to "ongoing discussion" on that talkpage. Symbols of Europe hasn't been moved, so it wasn't protected. - SSJ ☎ 08:01, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Use of name in article

I think we should stick with the long form in the infobox as we can afford a longer and more formal designation there. In the lead of course, the first instance should reflect the name of the article and the words right after make it all clear anyway. It is a bit odd to say "the flag of xyz is the flag of xyz". If you don't agree with me on the infobox then revert.- J Logan ^t: 09:12, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

If Hitler had a famous dog he called "The Ruler of the Milky Way", and it had its own Wikipedia article, we wouldn't put "Dog of Adolf Hitler and Eva Braun" on top of the infobox - we would have written "The Ruler of the Milky Way". I think the point we have perhaps missed in our debate is that the name of the flag is European Flag/Flag of Europe. We don't use this title because because the CoE can claim to be Europe (though it consist of nearly all states) - but because both the EU and the CoE actually call it the European Flag/Flag of Europe. I'm just saying "Flag of Europe" is formal. But I won't die if the infobox doesn't have that name on top. I understand. - SSJ ☎ 09:42, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Point taken, though flag of the European Union is also use, of course that excludes Council of Europe and I've never seen it written as "flag of the Council of Europe". You have a point though, I'll put it back unless a consensus against it pops up.- J Logan ^t: 10:36, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. - SSJ ☎ 11:06, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

CCNR

Anyone know anything about the flag of the Central Commission for Navigation on the Rhine? I remember seeing it in Strasbourg [7] years ago and noting it being similar to the EU flag. Now of course the blue is for water and stars are common, and of course the CCNR is very old so it is not a derivative flag (unless someone knows if this flag was only created post-ww2?) but it could have helped the inspiration? After all, the designer possibly took inspiration from a window in the cathedral of Strasbourg, he probably saw this flag flying too and it was the closest thing to Europe in those old days. FOTW only has info on its design, and I have seen no other data on it. If anyone knows more, it would be welcome.- J Logan ^t: 17:54, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Here's an SVG version. The Book of Revelation has been confirmed as the source of inspiration, but yes the similarity between the ccr flag and the European flag is very striking. I didn't know circles of yellow stars on a blue field were so common. - SSJ ☎ 09:53, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the image SSJ. It could still have had an impact of course, they are oddly common though. Wish I could find some real data on this, it would be nice to have a bit more on the WEU flag too.- J Logan ^t: 13:39, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

No problem. Yes, we need more info. Perhaps one should search the web in french and Dutch etc., and then use google translate if something is found. - SSJ ☎ 18:43, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

More information

European NAvigator has lots of background information and images from the European flag's inception. See here. We should really use this. - SSJ ☎ 15:31, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

I tried shifting through that a while back for useful info, don't really have the time to do it now. It would need a lot of work to go through and link up all their raw data. I'll might be able to get through it later but no time soon. Anyone else up for the hunt?- J Logan ^t: 09:14, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

worth mentioning?

Anyone think these are worth mentioning: [8] [9]. The latter is probably not that notable, the first though is a maybe considering it is the only official naval jack - in fact the only flag other than the main one to be officially approved for anything.- J Logan ^t: 13:49, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Here's an SVG version. Yes I guess mentioning the fishing pennant is a good idea, since it's official. Placing it in the infobox is the obvious choice, but is this flag used in practice? I've never seen it or heard about it before. - SSJ ☎ 14:33, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Well... has your boat been inspected whilst fishing in the North Sea? How many people have? I don't suppose it gets on tv much either. Seen the Norwegian version (I'm sure there would be one flown by investigation teams)? I'll include it further down the article for now, if we hear anything beyond FOTW then we might move it up. How's that sound. One thing that might be good though, along the lines of using the ena.lu data you mentioned, is a 15 star flag. If you look through the files they actually made it and displayed it at a press conference. Think it is worth putting an image in the article, or might it be a bit redundant?- J Logan ^t: 22:04, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

What you've done is perfect for now. I'll upload a couple of fair-use images from ena.lu sooner or later I think. - SSJ ☎ 23:40, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough, we could do with the Delors picture back (the one where they raise the flag in the 1980s) though with full fair use on it. We should figure out where we need it first though as we have a habit of uploading fair use for one article then it spreads to 50 and gets deleted. This page, the history page (not the main one, the one covering the 1980s) and the Delors Commission page?- J Logan ^t: 09:50, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:EUAT2006KoolhaasLogo.jpg

The image File:EUAT2006KoolhaasLogo.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

The following images also have this problem:

• File:EU organic farming logo.svg

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --08:58, 4 January 2009 (UTC) eEvey

Info box: flag adoption dates

8th December 1955 (CoE)

The info box states the adoption date was the 8 December 1955 (for the CoE). Yet http://web.archive.org/web/20050507141805/http://info.coe.int/archives/hist/flag/55x32.pdf states it was the 9th. Sean Murphy of the Centre for Irish Genealogical and Historical Studies says (here) "there is in the online archives of the Council of Europe a transcript of an interview in French with Paul Levy conducted as recently as February 1998, in which he claims that he contrived with Léon Marchal, then Secretary-General of the Council of Europe, to have the European flag adopted on 8 December 1955". Unfortunately the link he gave to verify this claim is dead : (http://info.coe.int/archives/hist/flag/levy_1998.pdf ).--Trounce (talk) 22:42, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

I found : http://www.ena.lu/resolution_55_32_committee_ministers_council_europe_december_1955-020005258.html which gives the date as the 8th and http://www.coe.int/T/E/Com/About_Coe/flag.asp --Trounce (talk) 23:05, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Council of Europe says 8th, and they're the ones who adopted it. Check the reference given.- _J.Logan`^t: 19:07, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

I know. I was the one who put the reference there.--Trounce (talk) 19:44, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

26 May 1986 (EU)
The EU didn't exist until 1992/1993. Should it not read something like: 26 May 1986 (EEC)?
Also, I cant find a source for 26 May 1986 as the adoption date for the EEC. This is the nearest I could get, but it only says it was first used (not adopted) at the beginning of 1986 (January?)

According to this (the caption under the flag) it was chosen at the Milan European Council of June 1985--Trounce (talk) 12:43, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

According to the caption under this photo (unfortunately the link erroneously comes up in French) it was raised for the first time in front of the seat of the Commission in Brussels on the 29 May 1986.--Trounce (talk) 18:02, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, date issue fixed. Regards to EU/EEC, EU is continuation of EEC and infobox is meant to be simple. Difference can be confusing to people who don't know the details so for them its better to stick EU, as they will want to know that, and EEC/EU is clarified in text.- _J.Logan`^t: 19:07, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Its fairly patronizing to say that people would be confused by having the correct term in the info box. This is meant to be an encyclopedia. I think accuracy if preferable to simplicity. If people are gonna be confused by a couple of initials after a date then they're at the wrong website. Its not rocket science.

I propose we alter the second date to 29 May 1985 (EEC) and add a third date 1 November 1993 (EU). If people are that confused by it they can click the wiki links to the EEC/EU and learn something!

Also, do you have a source for the 29 May 1985 as the EEC adoption date?--Trounce (talk) 19:44, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

For the source, just check the text. The council summit was 28-29 June, as the conclusions are issued at the end of the summit, the adoption date was the 29th.

It is not patronising, it is not patronising, it is simplification. The infobox is meant to quick check, you don't say (for a hypothetical example) the something kingdom adopted the green flag in 1771, the something empire adopted the green flag in 1861, the something republic adopted the green flag in 1901, the second something republic adopted the green flag in 1991. The EU is a simple continuation of the EEC and to keep the information simple and quick (while maintaining the detail in the text) the infobox should just be EU.

If you put EEC, people might not connect to the EU. If you put EEC then EU then people might read it as being used by three institutions rather than two.- _J.Logan`^t: 21:22, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

If the council summit was 28-29 June why do you have the date as 29 May ?

In my opinion your point about people not connecting the EEC and EU etc. is totally patronizing. Give the readers some credit. They'll be able to handle another date. Having 3 dates in the infobox doesn't break any "info box rules". I definitly think the dates in the infobox should be like this:

Europe

Use	National flag and state and naval ensign
Proportion	2:3
Adopted	8 December 1955 http://www.ena.lu/resolution_55_32_committee_ministers_council_europe_december_1955-020005258.html (CoE) 29 May 1985 (EEC) 1 November 1993 (EU)
Design	A circle of 12 5-pointed gold stars on a blue field.
Designed by	Arsène Heitz and Paul Lévy

If any reader is so "confused" by the multitude of dates and acronyms they can either read this article or click on the EEC or EU wikilink and all will be explained. It totally un-encyclopedic to massage the facts to fit some body's personal notion of the readers intelligence and/or how many dates should be in an infobox.--Trounce (talk) 17:07, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Granted on the May, I was concentrating on the text.

1) this is not about the readers intelligence, it is about the readers knowledge - and on the EU it can be very limited (not always due to their own fault). 2) I am not saying anything about infobox "rules", it is the principle of keeping things simple. 3) Technically, the EU didn't adopt it at all when it was created, it merely inherited the previous adoption - so it would also be inaccurate if you want to argue it on facts. 4) An article is meant to support itself, so you can't say they can find out via the wikilink.

Btw, I don't mean to sound patronising, I just don't have much time to deal with all this so I am just writing very short without pleasantries.- _J.Logan`^t: 19:32, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

No, I don't mean you are patronizing to me in this discussion. I mean the logic of your argument is patronizing to the readers of the article. You assume that if they don't know about the EEC becoming the EU then they won't be able to cope with that, or understand it, or come to terms with it. And so you've decided to massage the facts to simplify the reality and fit your own personal view of things.

As regards "it is the principle of keeping things simple", adding the EEC date and the correct EU date doesn't complicate anything. If simplicity is the most important criteria then on that logic we should only have one date 8 Dec 1955 (EU) !!! However I don't think simplicity is the most important criteria. Not in this case anyway. I could understand your point if I was trying to put in 5 or 6 dates.

Point 3) "Technically, the EU didn't adopt it at all"...Then all the more reason to have 29 June 1985 (EEC) !!!.

Point 4) Well I did say they could read this article or use the wikilinks.--Trounce (talk) 20:06, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Right, I was meaning I wasn't trying to patronising readers, not do I suggest they won't "come to terms with it", simply that it may be misinterpreted due to lack of background knowledge. But on what you say, that "massage the facts to simplify the reality and fit your own personal view of things" - what exactly is supposed to be my personal view of things? It is starting to sound like a weird conspiracy theory here! Finally, on the third point again - the EU inherited the EEC adoption, and the EEC doesn't exist anymore. Hence it is 29 June 1985 (EU).- _J.Logan`^t: 10:44, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

My opinion: i think the three-dates-solution (CoE, EEC, EU) is alright. A matter of psychology, but since the EU is a product of the post-Cold-War-period, while the EEC is a product of the Cold-War-period itself, you can say that there were two different adoptions in two very different eras. The EU is not just - as it technically is - the successor of the EEC, it is alos the hyperinflated product of an period when boundaries came down. --RCS (talk) 15:40, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

@ _J.Logan`^t : I think that your point that "it may be misinterpreted due to lack of background knowledge" is patronizing to the readers. You may not mean to patronize them, but the logic in your argument is patronizing. Give them some credit. They won't misinterpret anything. I don't mean to infer any conspiracy theory at all. The fact is the EU didn't exist in 1985. The fact is (as you pointed out) "Technically, the EU didn't adopt it at all". Yet despite these two facts, to suit your personal view that "it may be misinterpreted due to lack of background knowledge" you have set the 29 June 1985 as the adoption date for the EU! --Trounce (talk) 17:47, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

@ RCS Thanks for your input.--Trounce (talk) 17:47, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Well its like saying, if it wasn't in the constitution, that the current French republic didn't adopt their flag as it was adopted by the previous French republic. And on readers, people do generally know sod all about the EU, some of the older generation think it is still the EEC, because there is very little in the media. We are an encyclopaedia anyway, people are coming here to learn so we have to assume that many won't know it all to begin with or they wouldn't be here.

Finally, although I disagree with RCS's precise reasoning, there is now a majority against and it is a small issue. But I would like a footnote included next to the EU date stating its adoption was a continuation of the EEC's which it replaced.- _J.Logan`^t: 11:01, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

I'd say there is no reason to be against such a footnote. Cheers, RCS (talk) 11:10, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Yeah it is a small issue, but if its worth doing its worth doing right! I have no problem with a footnote.--Trounce (talk) 12:30, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Congrégation mariale des hommes

Talk about coincidences: this congregation venerates a statue of Mary crowned with twelve stars, and has a council of twelve members. It is situated in Strasbourg, the very seat of the CoE's seat. And the CoE gave Strasbour Cathedral, in 1956, a stained glass window showing the Virgin in the very position she also has on that congregation's banner! Now, what about thinking that someone in the CoE was a member of, or close to, that congregation?--RCS (talk) 13:42, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Quite possible as, even if the delegates weren't, the council would have drawn a lot of local staff and the flag designer was a Strasbourger. So you have someone wanting to sneak religious symbolism past the Turks and Socialists, local Strasbourger worker at the Council has this image in their mind from being in the Cathedral (for whatever reason) and thinks it makes a good image, proposes it (maybe even just because they think it looks good). It is accepted for whatever reasons the Council has,m be it religious or stylistic.- _J.Logan`^t: 15:27, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Flag of Europe/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   The lead is well written, but perhaps a bit short. All sections of the article should be mentioned in the lead, but it currently does not have parts from "Derivative designs", "History" nor anything about why there are twelve stars. A lead twice the length would be preferred. I would have preferred that the colors (golden, yellow and blue) were wikilinked in the main section, instead of the lead. The lead usually collects a lot of blue links, and it is better to save some of the more trivial ones (like color) to the main body. It is unclear if Arsène Heitz submitted one of dozens of designs, since the first half of the sentence is in pluran, and the second half in singular. It would be better if one type of block quotation was used (there are two different styles now). On a general note, the author of this article writes too long sentances; they should be cut down in length by adding commas, semicolons and often a period. I have copyedited away most of the extreme cases.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   There is at least one [citation needed] tag. Under the quotation in "design", I am confused where the quote is from; is it also from ref 6? There must be no unambiguity regarding where quotes are sourced. Many of the references are correctly formatted in the {{cite}} template.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   File:EUAT2006KoolhaasLogo.jpg lacks a fair use rationale, and I am uncertain if one would be valid in this article (I would presume the fair use could only be claimed on the article about the the presidency, but I am uncertain).

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   I am placing the article on hold. There are some references lacking (including {{fact}} tags placed during the review), and I would like to see a longer lead. Otherwise well written and exiting article. If you have any questions or comments, do not hesitate to state them. Arsenikk ^(talk) 12:31, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Either by me or others, I think all issues are sorted except for length of sentences and the image rationale (I'll leave that to someone who can understand copyright). Correct me if I'm wrong.- _J.Logan`^t: 19:21, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Sorry for not seeing this comment sooner. All the content issues are now resolved, but I have had to remove the image in question, since it cannot be claimed within fair use. I seem to have made a critical orthographic mistake under section 2, where my point was that there are quite a number of references that are not in {{cite}} tages, and these should be converted, along with adding |accessdate = to them. Once this is done, I will pass the article. Arsenikk ^(talk) 18:19, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

All matters have been seen to, and this article should now be considered a good article. Congratulations! Arsenikk ^(talk) 15:57, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, and thank you very much for your time.- _J.Logan`^t: 17:27, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

This is not the flag of the EU!

Until recently, I thought that the blue flag with the twelve "golden" stars was the flag of the EU. Wrong! Recently I visited the state of Andorra, and both at its Spanish and its French border it shows big blue signs with the 12 stars. But then I found out that VAT is not always added to the amount indicated on bills (which is a EU-wide regulation.. And after I came home, I noted that I had to pay an extra fee for my ATM withdrawals, even if they were in Euro's. When I complained, the bank said that Andora is not part of the EU/EFTA "Eurozone", even if euro's are the only means of payment in the country (before the Euro, Andorra used both Franch francs and Spanish pesetas).

Finally, EU people explained to me that the flag is the flag of the Concil of Europe countries (COE). As you all know, that includes almost all European countries, including Russia (but except Belarus - which is not applying human rights)

The article says that the flag represents both the EU and the COE. That is misleading. Rbakels (talk) 12:23, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Just because it is the CoE flag, does not mean it is not the EU flag. This article is accurate, please read its details and read the articles on the euro.- _J.Logan`^t: 21:00, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

It isn't the EU flag. It's the EEC and CoE flag. The Treaty of Lisbon omitted articles about a flag that were in the EU constitution that was turned down. Gerard von Hebel (talk) 00:44, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

"Queen of Heaven"?

The woman in Revelation 12 is never referred to as the "Queen of Heaven". The only place in the Bible that phrase appears is in the book of Jeremiah, in reference to a pagan goddess. Could someone correct that?

71.241.83.232 (talk) 18:55, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

The article Queen of Heaven#Biblical Basis might not accept "never".--Rumping (talk) 22:11, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Historical United States flag

In a continuation of the above section #CCNR, I would like to point out a historical United States flag I just stumbled upon:

US_flag_13_stars_–_Betsy_Ross.svg, and a photo of historical US flags including this one: US_historical_flags-United_States_of_America.jpg.

Admittedly, the stars are white and not yellow/golden, but aside from that minor point, the design recalls the European flag even more than the CCNR flag mentioned above: Almost exactly the same number of stars (an alternative design, Image:Cowpens Flag.svg, features twelve stars surrounding an additional star in the centre), same arrangement, and a dark blue background. In addition, one of the designs for the first flag of the newly independent Thirteen Colonies (note that there are four designs pictured in Flag of the United States#Historical progression of designs: the 13 stars in a circle design, the 12+1 stars, a half circle, and only one out of four that is similar to the current design and does not include a circle arrangement) is an obvious (and inherently rather much more likely) inspiration for the designer of a flag for the Council of Europe (also keep in mind that at the time, the United States were actually rather similar to Europe then and now in that the population identified with the member states more than with the union; the turning point was the Civil War, only after which a true US identity could develop). --Florian Blaschke (talk) 19:17, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Also, note that legend has it that the original, first flag of the United States was exactly the Betsy Ross flag, which makes this design likely to have been particularly well-known to the designer of the European flag. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 19:40, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

File:Eiffel-tower-2008.png Nominated for Deletion

	An image used in this article, File:Eiffel-tower-2008.png, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests June 2011 What should I do?
	A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 10:59, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Flag of Cape Verde - similarity?

The flag of Cape Verde, a former Portuguese colony, clearly seems to have been inspired by the European flag, with the similiarity even being mentioned on the flag's article. See the image of the flag on the right for comparison.

Cape Verde Flag

Is it worth noting this in the "Derivative designs" section of the article?? It's certainly more similar to the European flag than the Bosnian flag is (the arrangement of the stars is more similar). And Cape Verde does have European connections as it was a former colony - this could part of the symbolism?

Thanks. Peter (talk) 22:33, 1 August 2011 (UTC) The EU flag is clearly based on the old (Masonic) US flag that had 13 stars oriented into a circle. This was called the Betsy Ross flag. So it wouldn't be correct to derive the Cap Valverdian to this historical Masonic banner. 78.71.209.195 (talk) 10:19, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

Edit request: 13 September 2012

Could some user please correct the year of adoption of the flag by the EEC... Is it 1984 or 85? Thanks in advance. --E4024 (talk) 00:28, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Marian interpretation

It turns out that this "Marian" (or "Revelations") thing goes back to 1987, when Arsène Heitz, who was in fact one of the designers submitting proposals, began to boast about how he snuck Marian veneration into the European Council.

Now, it seems to be a fact that Heitz made these claims, and that they were discussed in journalism during the late 1980s and the 1990s, but it also seems to have been established (by Gialdino 2005) that Heitz' claims are spurious. In fact it seems that his design had 15 stars that were not even in a circle.

Ok, so this guy became a religious zealot late in life and boasted to priests about this. That would solve the "Heitz" part.

What I find far stranger is the "Lévy" side of this. Apparently, nobody suggested any religious connotation prior to 1987, but after Heitz came up with this, Lévy was asked to give interviews, where (in 1989) he denied that he was aware of any such connection. Then, in 1998 (i.e. ten years later, and probably frustrated because the journalists clearly were never going to shut up about this now), he went further and claimed that Heitz had never even directly designed this, and that it was essentially his own design.

Then, later in 1998, Die Welt publishes a heart-warming anecdote on how Lévy during the Holocaust vowed to convert to Catholicism if he survived, and later, when charged with designing the flag, was inspired as "one day he walked past a statue of Mary and was struck by the Virgin's crown of stars gleaming in the Sun before the background of the azure sky". The thing is that this directly contradicts what Lévy himself had stated in interviews spanning the best part of a decade. So this article is a rather vicious attack on Lévy, basically calling him a liar, but it shows no awareness of this. Also, there isn't a trace of the details of this story before, so it seems whoever wrote for Die Welt here made this up out of thin air. Also note that Die Welt known as a serious newspaper, not a tabloid rag.

Apparently, this has now revived the "Marian" story, this time pushing the idea on Lévy (who did not want this) instead of Heitz (who actively sought credit for it). --dab (𒁳) 14:12, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 4 external links on Flag of Europe. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20091118061239/http://www.allstates-flag.com:80/fotw/flags/eu_law.html to http://www.allstates-flag.com/fotw/flags/eu_law.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20140830113416/http://www.daylife.com/photo/0fic7mj4ujchD/European_Union to http://www.daylife.com/photo/0fic7mj4ujchD/European_Union
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080618220608/http://www.balkaninsight.com:80/en/main/news/7950/ to http://www.balkaninsight.com/en/main/news/7950/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090227042738/http://www.venez-chez-domi.fr/blog/wp-content/uploads/2007/07/32-abside-notre-dame-de-strasbourggrande.jpg to http://www.venez-chez-domi.fr/blog/wp-content/uploads/2007/07/32-abside-notre-dame-de-strasbourggrande.jpg

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 02:21, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Flag of Europe. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20121224160854/http://test2.leicester.gov.uk/EasySite/lib/serveDocument.asp?doc=79094&pgid=89035 to http://test2.leicester.gov.uk/EasySite/lib/serveDocument.asp?doc=79094&pgid=89035

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 09:16, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Flag of Europe. 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.allstates-flag.com/fotw/flags/eu_law.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 04:01, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Flag of Europe. 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 http://web.archive.org/web/20081219113545/http://www.governo.it/Presidenza/cerimoniale/onorificenze_araldica/documentazione/sistema_onorifico_rep_it.pdf to http://www.governo.it/Presidenza/cerimoniale/onorificenze_araldica/documentazione/sistema_onorifico_rep_it.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070807045151/http://www.coe.int/T/E/Com/About_Coe/flag.asp to http://www.coe.int/T/E/Com/About_Coe/flag.asp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 15:18, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Flag of Europe. 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/20070715135147/https://www.crwflags.com:80/fotw/flags/eu!1.html to http://www.crwflags.com/fotw/flags/eu!1.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://eubusiness.com/news-eu/1221140822.65
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081205083719/https://homepage.eircom.net/~seanjmurphy/chiefs/euroflagmemo.html to http://homepage.eircom.net/%7Eseanjmurphy/chiefs/euroflagmemo.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070815010838/https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/flags/ee-flag.html to https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/flags/ee-flag.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081205083719/https://homepage.eircom.net/~seanjmurphy/chiefs/euroflagmemo.html to http://homepage.eircom.net/%7Eseanjmurphy/chiefs/euroflagmemo.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 20:17, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

Flag Specification Picture Wrong

Hello all,

While reading this article, I noticed in the Design section, the picture of the flag specification, didn't match up to the description alongside it. After doing a bit of digging with the picture history and sources associated with that section, it appears the picture was changed on 15/04/2011, to show incorrect measurements. The picture from 16/02/2011 was correct according to the sources.

The question is, I don't know how to revert a picture to an older one. Could someone tell me how, or do it themselves please.

Lbmarshall (talk) 12:37, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Flag of Europe. 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 {{dead link}} tag to http://www.taoiseach.gov.ie/attached_files/RTF%20files/The%20National%20Flag.rtf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090528195931/http://www.coe.int/t/dgal/dit/ilcd/Fonds/Themes/Flags/Res(55)32_en.pdf to http://www.coe.int/t/dgal/dit/ilcd/fonds/themes/flags/Res(55)32_en.pdf

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) 11:27, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

References; "wider usage"

I have worked on this page before, but mostly limited to the "Marian interpretations" item. It has now come to my attention, that most of the content of the page is based on extremely poor references. Half of them seem to be archive.org copies of random web pages.

As a result, the contents are less than reliable, and I suspect have been allowed to drift according to the whims of passers-by. I am especially concerned about the "wider usage" topic, i.e. use outside of the EU and the CoE. Use in "sporting events" was supplied as an example of the ever wider and more general adoption of the flag, but it turns out that use of the flag at the Ryder Cup was a concerted, ideology-driven effort seen as so jarring by participants that the incident now figures in literature on sports and nationalism. Apart from the Ryder Cup, we just have the request by Romano Prodi that athletes at the 2004 Olympics please use the flag (without any reports as to whether the request was honoured), which is an interesting move in its own right, but clearly part of EU activism in propagating the flag rather than de facto "usage in sports".

The remaining part of "wider usage" appears to concern "colour revolutions", i.e. usage by pro-EU protesters in Eastern Europe during c. 2004–2014. It does not make sense to lump this together with "usage in sports", as it is the exact opposite in flavour: increased usage in sports would indicate a decrease in political ideology attached to the flag, while use by pro-EU protesters would indicate the opposite. Both trends may well exist in parallel in different spheres, but at this point we have evidence for one but not for the other. --dab (𒁳) 11:17, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Now placed under "history", as I think it has become clear that these entries reflect a coherent trend in Eastern European "pro-Europeanism" during the past decade, and they are best arranged chronologically. --dab (𒁳) 14:04, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Flag of Europe. 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/20060622134708/http://europa.eu/abc/symbols/emblem/graphics1_en.htm to http://europa.eu/abc/symbols/emblem/graphics1_en.htm
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.coe.int/t/dgal/dit/ilcd/fonds/themes/flags/Res%2855%2932_en.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070718074512/http://www.delukr.ec.europa.eu/page6858.html to http://www.delukr.ec.europa.eu/page6858.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.crwflags.com/fotw/flags/eu%211.html

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) 09:03, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Flag of Europe. 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/20080624184748/http://www.daylife.com/photo/058m1gweAF2Bh to http://www.daylife.com/photo/058m1gweAF2Bh
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080430140116/http://www.crwflags.com/fotw/Flags/ba-fccho.html to http://www.crwflags.com/fotw/flags/ba-fccho.html

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) 23:43, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

"Flag of the EU" now primary?

The flag has become so strongly associated with the EU since the 2000s that its more generic status as "flag for the whole of Europe" (and similar) is now mostly of historical interest. I conclude this from news sources routinely using "EU flag" and "flag of the EU" much more often than "Flag of Europe". This is already the case since most mentions of the flag in journalism are in direct connection to the EU. Google News gives me 83k hits for "flag of the EU", 70k for "Flag of the European Union" and 16k hits for "EU flag", as opposed to 23k for "Flag of Europe" and 4k for "European flag".

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

So the ratio against "Flag of Europe" appears to be close to about 8:1.

It is true that the flag has no official status as the "Flag of the EU", its status as such is purely de facto. On the other hand, it turns out that it does not even have official status as a flag, it is only called a "flag" de facto (because it ostensibly is), but there was no consensus to adopt the thing as a "flag", because the adoption of a flag would suggest a claim statehood, so it is officially just "an emblem".

The point is, it is probably time to use "Flag of the European Union" as the WP:UCN primary referent to the topic, delegating "flag of Europe" and "European emblem or flag" and the like to the historical discussion. --dab (𒁳) 12:05, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

Agreed.ApolloCarmb (talk) 12:08, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

I think I have researched this properly now. The EU does not have an official flag. The topic is highly political, as the proponents of accelerated European integration would like the EU to have a flag, and tried to introduce one in the failed constitution of 2005, and the EU and many other bodies refer to the emblem as "flag" as often as they can.

The term "flag of the EU" is still in WP:UCN common usage and it should be given as the popular name for the thing used both by proponents and detractors of the EU and its policies. All the more important, imho, to point out prominently, that the thing is an "emblem" and has never been adopted as a "flag", not out of negligence but thanks to the explicit opposition by the UK and other members. --dab (𒁳) 15:36, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

I had missed that the CoE has abandoned use of the emblem in 2013, as its association with the EU had become too strong. Since 2013, at least, this is definitely the "flag [officially: emblem] of the EU" for all purposes other than historical ones. --dab (𒁳) 09:19, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

Villa Schutzenberger image

29 April 2017. Flag still there (on the left, behind the foliage).

Re this, it isn't clear in what context this image is being shown. The photograph is from 2011, and the villa houses an institute of the CoE. Does this show historical use of the flag (seeing as the CoE has abandoned the emblem in 2013)? Or is the flag still being shown at Villa Schutzenberger, in which case it would be an example for the continued use of the flag by the CoE? Clearly, this image isn't being shown just to illustrate the design of the flag, as the flag is barely visible in the photograph, and we have dozens of more compelling illustrations. Please point out what is being said in words instead of posting suggestive imagery, and also if possible place encyclopedically viable images in sections of the article relevant to what is being shown in the image. --dab (𒁳) 12:01, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

Excuse me, but are you sure that the CoE has abandoned the emblem in 2013? Not only does the article say nothing about this, the very website of the CoE doesn't say this, either: https://www.coe.int/en/web/about-us/the-european-flag. And yes, the flag is still flown on Villa Schutzenberger, as this photo from 29 April 2017 clearly shows: https://www.flickr.com/photos/zephyrios/41859104182/sizes/h/. I am getting the feeling that you are messing around with things here that should better left alone... --Edelseider (talk) 13:07, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

well, thank you for your reply. Please note that this is absolutely unacceptable. I have taken care to research this in great detail, citing references at each step. Just because you can cite a web-page does not make it "reasonable" to assume that all my obsessive referencing to official documents and academic publications can be reverted wholesale.

So let's discuss if the CoE has "abandoned" the flag. It has not "abandoned" it in the sense that it keeps urging European organisations of all stripes to use it. It has abandoned it as an emblem representing the Council of Europe.

These two facts are related: the CoE from the beginning wished the flag to represent "Europe", and not just the CoE as an institution. Now, the flag has come to represent the "idea of Europe" as advocated by the European Union so strongly that it is used as a symbol of EU membership. Waving the flag at Euromaidan or in the Brexit campagin does not express support for the Council of Europe, it expresses the desire for EU membership.

The CoE has recognized this state of affairs in 2013 by adopting a new logo. From this moment on, the flag is no longer "the emblem of the CoE", because the CoE now has a new emblem. The flag however continues to be a symbol for European integration and is endorsed as such by the CoE.

17 member states of the EU have explicitly recognized it as a flag symbolizing "allegiance to the EU" (and 11 members have not done so, so this interpreation remains an unilateral choice).

If you agree with this state of affairs (as I am sure you do, because I think these are just the basic facts accepted by everybody on every side of the divide), please help us come up with a proper phrasing representing this situation in the lead.

Please also note that web pages, even "official websites" of international organisations, are not official documents. These website often host the official documents, but you need to find them and cite them properly, you cannot base this on second-guessing web design decisions.

I have no intention of "messing" with things that aren't in need of fixing. I was surprised to learn that the EU has no official flag, and the article was not doing a very good job at clarifying the situation. If the CoE continues to fly the "European flag" in spite of no longer using it as its logo, this can very well be mentioned, but it is not the same as saying that this flag continues to be the emblem of the CoE. --dab (𒁳) 07:47, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

For the record: this picture (no permission to upload on Commons given) from 29 April 2018: https://www.flickr.com/photos/29864509@N07/42178298501/in/album-72157695205600331/. --Edelseider (talk) 08:18, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• Commemorative 2 Euro coin in Lithuania containing the European flag.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:37, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Is it possible that the design has masonic meaning, like the US flag? 12 stars, each representing a zodiac, and the field being blue because this is the color of Aquarius, the age we are either in or are going to enter into? This would fit the masonic "new world order" narrative. 78.71.209.195 (talk) 10:10, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

Masonic Symbolism

Is it possible that the design has masonic meaning, like the US flag? 12 stars, each representing a zodiac, and the field being blue because this is the color of Aquarius, the age we are either in or are going to enter into? This would fit the masonic "new world order" narrative. 78.71.209.195 (talk) 10:11, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Timbre Conseil de l'Europe 1965 gravé par Decaris.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 02:16, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

Wrong date?

The article states that the flag was adopted on 8 December 1955 by the Council of Europe. But according to both the website of the Council of Europe and the adopted resolution, the date was 9 December, not 8 December. --Glentamara (talk) 18:24, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

@Glentamara: I suppose that back when the article was written, these links did not yet exist. That, or somebody sneakily vandalized the article and no one really noticed; these kinds of things happen. --Edelseider (talk) 18:49, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

On the other hand, this valid source does say 8 December 1955. It's from the Council of Europe, too: [10]. --Edelseider (talk) 18:50, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

I've noticed the material from CVCE, but I wonder if it is really reliable. It's not an original document, so it might have been edited by CVCE. The original document clearly says "9 December", and also the website of the Council of Europe, which should be reliable. --Glentamara (talk) 20:41, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

@Glentamara: I would say that the CVCE is reliable, at least per self-description: https://www.cvce.eu/en. But you can go ahead and replace "8" by "9", it can't be wrong! --Edelseider (talk) 20:47, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

@Edelseider: Yes, I don't question that CVCE is a reliable source in general. But they might have made an error by mistake when they edited the text. That's why I think a copy of the original resolution is more reliable. Thanks, I will go ahead and edit the article. --Glentamara (talk) 20:52, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

GA Reassessment

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Flag of Europe/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

This article has serious issues with substantial unsourced content and concerns about recentism bias. To be kept as a good article, such issues will need to be addressed. (t · c) buidhe 06:31, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

Ambiguous "Construction sheet"

The "Construction sheet" image on the page (as seen today 14/May/2023) is ambiguous:

Centre to star centre indicated as "2/3".

Diameter of each start indicated as "2/9".

This is correct in that the fly/width and hoist/height are 3 and 2 respectively in that "sheet", but is ambiguous because the text e.g. mentions "1/9" for the diameter of the stars but the image shows "2/9". Phylasnier (talk) 19:27, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

Is the incorrect versions section necessary/appropriate?

I checked some other flag articles and they generally don't include a section showing incorrect versions of flags. I was wondering why exactly this article needs such a section? It doesn't seem very fitting, given the type of content Wikipedia articles typically contain anyway, and as long as the article uses the correct version of the flag, I'm not sure why there needs to be a section showcasing incorrect variants. Alex the weeb (talk) 20:01, 20 June 2023 (UTC)