This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A fact from Coat of arms of the Turks and Caicos Islands appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 27 July 2021 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Coat of arms of the Turks and Caicos Islands. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 00:58, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was: promoted by
MeegsC (
talk)
10:51, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
5x expanded by Bloom6132 ( talk). Self-nominated at 00:15, 23 June 2021 (UTC).
"when the designer or an official at the Admiralty reportedly mistaken …"Hope that works. — Bloom6132 ( talk) 15:39, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
Nothing about this until well after the fact, and it appears to have grown, as folklore so often does, by a string of added assumptions being raised first as a possibility, then taken as fact. Qwirkle ( talk) 14:12, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
A commercial source advertising flags for sale which gives space to a self-published writer is not, in itself, a particularly strong cite. (From what I’ve read of it, the guy does seem to have some expertise, though.)
Referring to it as the “igloo” badge does not validate the fairytale this wiki page vectors, it may merely mean “the one some people claim look like igloos”. Note that it does not claim the Admiralty used this term.
Igloos were “in” in the 1870s, everybody knew what they looked like…or at least what they outta look like. A proper round dome, with an arched tunnel covering the entry point.
Finally, note the section’s title. Contemporaneous? Qwirkle ( talk) 22:44, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
Cite after (modern) cite mentions “doors. Picture after picture shows a single black mark on oneof the salt piles, the right from the viewer’s point of view. So why do the stories have this wrong?
Different (modern) cites claim the supposed change was made either formally by the Admiralty or by some unspecified civil servant, or by an equally anonymous flagmaker. Does this suggest actual knowledge, or the usual variances of folklore?
No contemporaneous cites for igloos, one for “conical huts, most for “salt piles”. Why? Qwirkle ( talk) 03:39, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
The fact that the flag dates back doesnt bring the stories about how it came to look like that back in the past with it. Qwirkle ( talk) 19:14, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A fact from Coat of arms of the Turks and Caicos Islands appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 27 July 2021 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Coat of arms of the Turks and Caicos Islands. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 00:58, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
The result was: promoted by
MeegsC (
talk)
10:51, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
5x expanded by Bloom6132 ( talk). Self-nominated at 00:15, 23 June 2021 (UTC).
"when the designer or an official at the Admiralty reportedly mistaken …"Hope that works. — Bloom6132 ( talk) 15:39, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
Nothing about this until well after the fact, and it appears to have grown, as folklore so often does, by a string of added assumptions being raised first as a possibility, then taken as fact. Qwirkle ( talk) 14:12, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
A commercial source advertising flags for sale which gives space to a self-published writer is not, in itself, a particularly strong cite. (From what I’ve read of it, the guy does seem to have some expertise, though.)
Referring to it as the “igloo” badge does not validate the fairytale this wiki page vectors, it may merely mean “the one some people claim look like igloos”. Note that it does not claim the Admiralty used this term.
Igloos were “in” in the 1870s, everybody knew what they looked like…or at least what they outta look like. A proper round dome, with an arched tunnel covering the entry point.
Finally, note the section’s title. Contemporaneous? Qwirkle ( talk) 22:44, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
Cite after (modern) cite mentions “doors. Picture after picture shows a single black mark on oneof the salt piles, the right from the viewer’s point of view. So why do the stories have this wrong?
Different (modern) cites claim the supposed change was made either formally by the Admiralty or by some unspecified civil servant, or by an equally anonymous flagmaker. Does this suggest actual knowledge, or the usual variances of folklore?
No contemporaneous cites for igloos, one for “conical huts, most for “salt piles”. Why? Qwirkle ( talk) 03:39, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
The fact that the flag dates back doesnt bring the stories about how it came to look like that back in the past with it. Qwirkle ( talk) 19:14, 28 July 2021 (UTC)