Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Wikipedia had wrong Vatican flag for years – now incorrect flags are everywhere

catholicnewsagency.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 159 posts

Re: Wikipedia had wrong Vatican flag for years – now incorrect flags are everywhere

#131

Post by terminalcommand »

progbits wrote: post #33
addaon wrote: post #2

One of looking at this is that European banners, coats of arms, etc, are traditionally defined in writing (often using a domain-specific language called a blazon), and then compiled to a visual form by a banner maker. This compilation is intended to be reversible -- one goal is to be able to look up the written form in a book of heraldry based on the visual appearance -- but, just like compiling code, is not a one-to…

Constitution of Nepal has precise drawing instructions for their flag. See page 221: https://ag.gov.np/files/Constitution-of-Nepal_2072_Eng_www.m... Now of course you can't draw keys and tiara with Euclid-style instructions (in practice), but maybe countries should standardize their flag by publishing a canonical SVG file.

Turkish constitution defines Turkish flag in terms of geometry. The founder of our republic was a mathematics enthusiast. He also had a book on teaching geometry although his main profession was being a soldier.

Re: Wikipedia had wrong Vatican flag for years – now incorrect flags are everywhere

#133

Post by xxs »

progbits wrote: post #33
addaon wrote: post #2

One of looking at this is that European banners, coats of arms, etc, are traditionally defined in writing (often using a domain-specific language called a blazon), and then compiled to a visual form by a banner maker. This compilation is intended to be reversible -- one goal is to be able to look up the written form in a book of heraldry based on the visual appearance -- but, just like compiling code, is not a one-to…

Constitution of Nepal has precise drawing instructions for their flag. See page 221: https://ag.gov.np/files/Constitution-of-Nepal_2072_Eng_www.m... Now of course you can't draw keys and tiara with Euclid-style instructions (in practice), but maybe countries should standardize their flag by publishing a canonical SVG file.

While the svg does have a standard rfc, imagine the rfc gets changed to invalidate the standard, and your flag is altered (or svg become incompatible). A technical drawing with ratios and CMY(K)/Pantone coloring would be a proper fit, though.

Re: Wikipedia had wrong Vatican flag for years – now incorrect flags are everywhere

#134

Post by IIAOPSW »

lolinder wrote: post #54

This 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…

Having just read a bit about what the heraldry rules are and the purpose they serve, it strikes me as very similar to the design ideas of transit maps in modern times. You want the lines to be easily distinguishable, certain colors shouldn't run side by side (so the conventional wisdom says), you choose only from a minimalist simple pallet. In most places, the maps are diagrammatic, the lines can be arranged in any way so long as they connect the right stations in the right order. Convergent evolution.

Re: Wikipedia had wrong Vatican flag for years – now incorrect flags are everywhere

#135

Post by tgv »

zokier wrote: post #48

Just highlighting this twitter thread where people are finding all sorts of pre-wikipedia examples of Vatican flag, like this one from 1970: https://twitter.com/VinSlashLopez/status/1639478301885599745... So its obviously not just wikipedias invention, but a wider phenomenon.

> So its obviously not just wikipedias invention, but a wider phenomenon.

That doesn't make a difference, IMO. There were all sorts of wrong statements before wikipedia, but it wouldn't reflect well on wikipedia if they presented them.

Re: Wikipedia had wrong Vatican flag for years – now incorrect flags are everywhere

#136

Post by MayeulC »

marc_abonce wrote: post #126

There's a similar issue with the Mexican coat of arms in Wikipedia. The Wikipedia eagle has black claws and red eyes but the official one doesn't. [1][2][3] One time I tried to fix it but I don't know how to use Inkspace and it turned out to be trickier than it looks. I naïvely hoped I could just fix it with a bucket tool but it's not as simple, lol. [1] https://wrmx00.epimg.net/radio/imagenes/2019/09/16/nacional/...…

> I naïvely hoped I could just fix it with a bucket tool but it's not as simple, lol.

It's way simpler than that: open it, click it; you'll see everything is selected, so it's grouped (also visible in the status bar that describes the selection). Double click to enter the group; now you can select the correct shape. Once you have selected the shape you want to change, you can change its color by using the color bar, or bring up the color selector (from the UI, background and outline, or Ctrl-Shift-F).

However, I'd be cautious before modifying it. Do you have a better source than these for the colors? Ideally, in writing.

I can see some red eyes and black claws (with a central gradient similar to the one on the prickly pears) on your [3], which is closest to the Wikimedia image. The other two images have different colors and shapes for a lot of elements, including the plants.

There's another variant on that page: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mexico_coat_of_arms....

Re: Wikipedia had wrong Vatican flag for years – now incorrect flags are everywhere

#137

Post by MayeulC »

ummonk wrote: post #64

They also have a really wrong shade of saffron for the Indian flag, even though the Wiki article on the flag correctly specifies the colors. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_India#Colours Can't really blame them though, since the Indian government does the same. https://www.india.gov.in/india-glance/national-symbols

Seems like there is an edit war, or at least a discussion, on the file at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File_talk:Flag_of_India.s...

I imagine the other will be changed once there is a consensus, but it seems they're having trouble getting a definitive answer from the government.

Re: Wikipedia had wrong Vatican flag for years – now incorrect flags are everywhere

#139

Post by Semaphor »

lolinder wrote: post #54

This 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…

They link to this dude’s Vatican flag site [0] that has the 2023 version [1] which is a mix of the "correct" (it might be the correct pre-2023 version) and "incorrect" version (2023 seems to have yellow, not bronze, keys, white tiara). I’m left with still not knowing what the real flag is, if Wikipedia is now right, and why the article writer wrote so much without doing any real research.

[0] https://mnflag.tripod.com/vatflag/

[1] https://mnflag.tripod.com/vatflag/official-models1.png

Re: Wikipedia had wrong Vatican flag for years – now incorrect flags are everywhere

#140

Post by usernew »

fatfox wrote: post #17

I bet there’s a special place in hell for that Wikipedia editor. :>

There's a special place in hell for the Vatican. Pedo gay sex galore aside, the entire multi-billion dollar scammer organization, is disgusting. Went to visit while flying through. There's a long line in the square, it's sun-baking weather outside. They have the little roof-covered column things on the side, but the line is in the middle. No little tents over the line area - go ahead and stand there for 3 hours, at the zenith, in the middle of summer.

Well, burns and skin cancer, like tears inside the butt, bring you closer to god, as mother teresa always preached while on the scammin' trail, so all good - right? Nope, it's a sales tool. For a mere 300EUR you can bypass that line, and they have extremely rude and pushy sales people approach you multiple times as you suffer.

I gave up after 10 minutes. I took a selfie at their post office, now have a better story to tell, and my man-man virginity preserved. Although I probably would have been safe inside there, as I am an adult.

The special place in hell for that wiki editor, is called The Vatican. That whole area, the organization, and the people in it, are the definition of true and pure evil.

Post reply on HN