How is this not intentional? Is there some meaning with the additional red? I know Occam’s razor and all, but this is really suspicious to me.
Wikipedia had wrong Vatican flag for years – now incorrect flags are everywhere
111–120 of 159 posts
Re: Wikipedia had wrong Vatican flag for years – now incorrect flags are everywhere
#112It is amusing that an entity as obscenely rich as the Vatican isn’t providing official high quality images of their own flag. Maybe it isn’t as important in the grand scheme of things?
Harvard's endowment is far larger than the monetary wealth of the Vatican.
Re: Wikipedia had wrong Vatican flag for years – now incorrect flags are everywhere
#113How is this Wikipedia's fault if the Vatican doesn't even make usable graphics of their own flag available? I suppose an ancient conservative institution like the Catholic Church failing to adapt to the internet isn't all that surprising, but you can hardly blame well-willing volunteers for the Vatican's lack of public information.
The Catholic Church is like the Ents from LoTR.
Re: Wikipedia had wrong Vatican flag for years – now incorrect flags are everywhere
#114It is amusing that an entity as obscenely rich as the Vatican isn’t providing official high quality images of their own flag. Maybe it isn’t as important in the grand scheme of things?
> It is amusing that an entity as obscenely rich as the Vatican isn’t providing official high quality images of their own flag.
The State of Vatican City wasn’t rich before most of its assets were stripped and transferred to the Holy See (which also isn’t all that rich.)
The Catholic Church collectively has a lot of assets, but the vast majority of them aren’t controlled by the Holy See (and even less are controlled by the State of Vatican City), they belong to individual dioceses or religious communities.
> Maybe it isn’t as important in the grand scheme of things?
DINGDINGDINGDING
Re: Wikipedia had wrong Vatican flag for years – now incorrect flags are everywhere
#115This feels like the author jumped to the conclusion that Wikipedia was at fault because it's a common enough story and sounded good, but it doesn't add up. See addaon's comment for an explanation of why heraldry here isn't as cut-and-dry as we're used to for, say, the US flag. But even aside from that, the author neglected to check the full edit history on the Wikipedia file: the very first version of the flag (25 No…
> It's hard to imagine the flag flown at the UN being done as a rush job from a Wikipedia article. After working years for a famous international company where anyone from the outside would imagine incredible efficiency, precision, mastery, etc., it is really not hard AT ALL to believe.
I very much imagine they pulled it off wikipedia.
Re: Wikipedia had wrong Vatican flag for years – now incorrect flags are everywhere
#116This feels like the author jumped to the conclusion that Wikipedia was at fault because it's a common enough story and sounded good, but it doesn't add up. See addaon's comment for an explanation of why heraldry here isn't as cut-and-dry as we're used to for, say, the US flag. But even aside from that, the author neglected to check the full edit history on the Wikipedia file: the very first version of the flag (25 No…
Adding more evidence to the pile, here's a red-tiara version on the Vatican's own website from a page last updated in 2001: https://www.vatican.va/news_services/press/documentazione/do...
and the WaybackMachine confirms it's been there since at least Jan 2002: https://web.archive.org/web/20020112222602/http://www.vatica...
edit: Also the very first version of Wikipedia's Vatican City flag uploaded in 2005 also had a red tiara! It only stopped being red in 2013: https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Flag_of... (look for the 1st upload in the history)
(side note: the Vatican keeping the same URLs up for 2+ decades is a refreshing change of pace!)
Re: Wikipedia had wrong Vatican flag for years – now incorrect flags are everywhere
#117Wikipedia had Brigham Young University listed as Michael Jackson's Alma mater for a year.
The article on George Galloway, lists more lies and propaganda than a German speech, and they have NO plans to remove any of it.
Wait until you see the article on the IBM PC. Wow.
"Wikipedia was at fault." They are never at fault. They just host the largest collection of loud mouth opinionators on the planet:
I have absolute an irritable proof: Hit random, until you find an article about, say... something you know about. Find the first error. Point it out in the talk section, and watch it get shot down.
Re: Wikipedia had wrong Vatican flag for years – now incorrect flags are everywhere
#118This feels like the author jumped to the conclusion that Wikipedia was at fault because it's a common enough story and sounded good, but it doesn't add up. See addaon's comment for an explanation of why heraldry here isn't as cut-and-dry as we're used to for, say, the US flag. But even aside from that, the author neglected to check the full edit history on the Wikipedia file: the very first version of the flag (25 No…
Yeah, what this really shows is that flags are not nearly as precise as we sometimes imagine them to me.
For instance, most old heraldic crests and flags have their official formats described in plain text: "Blazon or, three lions passant guardant azure, langued and armed gules." That's the final word on the matter. It's then up to the flag maker to read that and create it correctly.
This can result in flags that look subtly different, with variations in how lions or whatever were drawn. Google "Royal Banner of Scotland" and you'll see a number of variations in how the red lion is drawn. Ditto, say, "Coat of arms of Finland."
These days those Google searches will show more and more the same images, with the Wikipedia effect (or general internet) but you can still find a wealth of examples of how different they used to be.
Re: Wikipedia had wrong Vatican flag for years – now incorrect flags are everywhere
#119Wikipedia had Brigham Young University listed as Michael Jackson's Alma mater for a year. The article on George Galloway, lists more lies and propaganda than a German speech, and they have NO plans to remove any of it. Wait until you see the article on the IBM PC. Wow. "Wikipedia was at fault." They are never at fault. They just host the largest collection of loud mouth opinionators on the planet: I have absolute an…
From the talk page of George Galloway: " Currently the article stands as a detailed report of every accusation upon the person. The article should be shortened by removing allegations which have proven not true. The article gives much more focus to negative allegations than is normal for article on a person and reading it, portrays a negatively biased picture of the person. " clearly against their policy of bias, with nothing being done, except to bias it further.
Re: Wikipedia had wrong Vatican flag for years – now incorrect flags are everywhere
#120Here is a more detailed version of the flag. https://www.istockphoto.com/photo/highly-detailed-flag-of-va...
This might be a flag variance problem. The heads of the keys have three different versions thus far in my search of images.