This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Flag of Belarus article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | Flag of Belarus is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() | This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on October 7, 2005. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
![]() | This article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
Why can't I see the thumbnail on the main page? I have to click on the image link to see the flag, and then only full-size. Also, several other flag images are blank. Yahnatan 00:14, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
i dont know...- User:Carsoncocars
I removed the sentence "Independent observers have said that the referendum that selected the current flag did not meet democratic standards." for the following reasons:
Paranoid 05:56, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
The 'White Rus' link is broken. Should it point to "White_Ruthenia"?
This article makes two references to the pre-1995 flag as the "Pahonia" flag. The pre-1995 coat of arms was indeed called "Pahonia" (other spellings exist) but I've never heard the flag referred to by the same name. See e.g. Pahonya. Comments anyone? -- Valentinian 14:26, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
The construction sheet shows the proportions of the flag incorrectly: the decorative pattern is given here as occupying one tenth of the flag's width, not the stated one ninth. Correct proportions are (reduced to the lowest integer factors): across, 2 and 16; down, 6 and 3. Vilcxjo 16:22, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
I know little of Belarus, though more than before after reading the article. But there may be a typo in the sentence "An example of their use would be a host offering his guests rye, bread, and salt, which would then be served on a rushnik." Shouldn't it read "rye bread and salt"? Peter 00:12, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
Hello! Can you please place a border around the flag of belarus it should not be so difficult i think
Sondre
According to the flag protocol ("By law, the Belarusian flag is supposed to be flown daily, weather permitting, from the following locations: (...) Military bases or military ships owned by the government"), the flag could be used as an ensign (governmental and naval), so I guess the right vexillological symbol is
or
or even
. Am I right?
NL-Ninane
16:34, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
The text says the following:
This is not because of the imperfection and incompleteness of the Belarusian law but this is the way how democracy works. Meursault2004 12:10, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
I think the sentence reads better now. Meursault2004 01:03, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
Dear fellow contributors
MOSNUM no longer encourages date autoformatting, having evolved over the past year or so from the mandatory to the optional after much discussion there and elsewhere of the disadvantages of the system. Related to this, MOSNUM prescribes rules for the raw formatting, irrespective of whether a date is autoformatted or not). MOSLINK and CONTEXT are consistent with this.
There are at least six disadvantages in using date-autoformatting, which I've capped here:
Removal has generally been met with positive responses by editors. Does anyone object if I remove it from the main text in a few days’ time on a trial basis? The original input formatting would be seen by all WPians, not just the huge number of visitors; it would be plain, unobtrusive text, which would give greater prominence to the high-value links. Tony (talk) 11:44, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi, is this an article by the regime? "Certain elements" use the right flag... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.2.165.141 ( talk) 20:02, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
The flag image in the lead is the 2012 design. It is not what was approved in 1995. It is similar to that, but it is a design which has had no official status until this year. It is not a design that was changed in 2012, it is a design that did not exist until 2012. The flag that was adopted in 1995 had a white margin either side of the red pattern, and that is not what is shown here. Kevin McE ( talk) 20:15, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
I have to agree with Zscout370 that this is a refinement of the design, not a complete change. If we took Kevin McE's approach then almost no flag older than ten years would have the correct date, as colours have been refined, flag shapes modified, lines thickened or narrowed, etc. none of which alter the basic design. One way of testing whether it is a new design or a refinement of an existing design is whether the average person on the street in the country concerned would notice the difference. In the case of Belarus I can confirm that Belarussians apparently don't notice the change as all the flags used at the Olympics in London are the old design and no one has complained! Incidentally the image on Wikipedia is slightly wrong as it omits the 1/189th of the flag length red stripe at the hoist. It is clearly shown on the specification diagram at Flag Specifcation at The State Committee on Standardization of the Republic of Belarus GrahamPadruig ( talk) 19:59, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
I feel the sentence should be added: The current ornamental pattern lacks, among other things, crosses easily visible even on the flag used in Soviet Union. This seems important to me as those differences are easily seen while comparing flags (the Soviet design, 1995-2012 design, current design) seen in the current article. Simply speaking, the current ornament pattern is greatly different from 1995-2012 pattern.
It would be nice to have any clear-cut explanation of this perplexing and intriguing issue. I simply do not understand why my editing regarding this is repetitively removed from both pl.wiki and en.wiki. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.11.177.39 ( talk) 18:52, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
I will do my best to be precise then. Crosses are visible within small rombs (two columns of four rombs) on both Soviet and 1995-2012 designs. These crosses are missing on current design. It seems to me that this is not a matter of optical delusion or simple widening of the pattern. If I am right the question is why it happened? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.11.33.153 ( talk) 17:00, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
Still, it is sad to me that these crosses are missing from the current design. Anything wrong with the crosses or what? Even for Soviets they were OK, but nowadays it is better to have them replaced? It's beyond my comprehension, really! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.11.142.233 ( talk) 16:01, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
It might be as you suggest, but do you have any idea why it was decided in 2012 that the way of design displaying rally needs to be changed. In what way it is more convenient than previous displays? Also, have in mind that all parts of ornamental pattern apparently have important spiritual/ideologic meaning attached to them, this is not simply a matter of decoration. = So the change of way of displaing might mean that spiritual meaning also changed. So again the question is why. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.11.117.223 ( talk) 05:39, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
OK, If you find anything definitive on why it was decided in 2012 that the ornamental pattern, apparently of folk origin and carrying important symbolic/spiritual messages characterizing the mentality of Belarus people as decribed in this wiki article, needs changes, share your knowledge with readers like me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.23.9.207 ( talk) 10:46, 16 November 2013 (UTC) Just to expand previous entry. Detailed description of the symbolic meaning of the decorative pattern can be found in pl.wiki article on Belarus flag. Again, why it was decided in 2012 to change the way of this pattern display.
According to One Europe - 100 Nations by Roy N. Pedersen (1992, Channel View Books, ISBN 1-85359-123-8): "On achieving independence, Belorussia briefly had a plain white flag, replaced in 1917 by the white-red-white flag ...". Domhnallbeag ( talk) 17:53, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
in section Similar flags the Flag of Arauca is different than the flag Arauca page — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.179.18.118 ( talk) 07:55, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
The link is wrong, The Arauca city flag is different from the Arauca Department flag — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.179.18.118 ( talk) 08:01, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Flag of Belarus. 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) 05:15, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 8 external links on Flag of Belarus. 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) 06:32, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
This article has been chunked up with images causing MOS:SANDWICH; in a Featured article, this should be addressed to retain status. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 17:32, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
@ Zscout370: SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 17:33, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The photo in the infobox, should be changed from Flag_of_Belarus_(1918,_1991–1995).svg to Flag_of_Belarus.svg. The white-red-white flag is not the current national flag, and this can cause confusion.( talk) 23:34, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
This article is listed as Featured, but it does not meet the WP:FARC. This article is not in good enough shape, as after comparison, it definitely does not match the level of other FA-class flag articles like Flag of Canada, Flag of India, Flag of Japan, Flag of Singapore. There needs to be improvement/expansion/creation of protocol, related flags and symbolism sections in the article Flag of Belarus. Compared to the other FA-class articles on national flags, this article also lacks a construction sheet, which is rather important. (posted this here at the suggestion of Z1720 at WT:URFA/2020 on 11 April 2022).-- Cukrakalnis ( talk) 11:08, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
Hi, @ Matthiaspaul. I noticed that you added "The white-red-white flag also gave inspiration to the white-blue-white flag used in the 2022 anti-war protests in Russia" to this article, but didn't provide a source. Could you please give your source for this statement? Thanks. Tol ( talk | contribs) @ 21:49, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
Why do we have the historical white-red-white flag in the infobox? This seems strange as other flag-based articles dont have this. They might have a variant flag, but not a historical flag, we should remove it, and keep it in the historical flags section.
~~~ LuNaCy ( talk) 18:07, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Flag of Belarus article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | Flag of Belarus is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() | This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on October 7, 2005. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
![]() | This article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
Why can't I see the thumbnail on the main page? I have to click on the image link to see the flag, and then only full-size. Also, several other flag images are blank. Yahnatan 00:14, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
i dont know...- User:Carsoncocars
I removed the sentence "Independent observers have said that the referendum that selected the current flag did not meet democratic standards." for the following reasons:
Paranoid 05:56, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
The 'White Rus' link is broken. Should it point to "White_Ruthenia"?
This article makes two references to the pre-1995 flag as the "Pahonia" flag. The pre-1995 coat of arms was indeed called "Pahonia" (other spellings exist) but I've never heard the flag referred to by the same name. See e.g. Pahonya. Comments anyone? -- Valentinian 14:26, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
The construction sheet shows the proportions of the flag incorrectly: the decorative pattern is given here as occupying one tenth of the flag's width, not the stated one ninth. Correct proportions are (reduced to the lowest integer factors): across, 2 and 16; down, 6 and 3. Vilcxjo 16:22, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
I know little of Belarus, though more than before after reading the article. But there may be a typo in the sentence "An example of their use would be a host offering his guests rye, bread, and salt, which would then be served on a rushnik." Shouldn't it read "rye bread and salt"? Peter 00:12, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
Hello! Can you please place a border around the flag of belarus it should not be so difficult i think
Sondre
According to the flag protocol ("By law, the Belarusian flag is supposed to be flown daily, weather permitting, from the following locations: (...) Military bases or military ships owned by the government"), the flag could be used as an ensign (governmental and naval), so I guess the right vexillological symbol is
or
or even
. Am I right?
NL-Ninane
16:34, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
The text says the following:
This is not because of the imperfection and incompleteness of the Belarusian law but this is the way how democracy works. Meursault2004 12:10, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
I think the sentence reads better now. Meursault2004 01:03, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
Dear fellow contributors
MOSNUM no longer encourages date autoformatting, having evolved over the past year or so from the mandatory to the optional after much discussion there and elsewhere of the disadvantages of the system. Related to this, MOSNUM prescribes rules for the raw formatting, irrespective of whether a date is autoformatted or not). MOSLINK and CONTEXT are consistent with this.
There are at least six disadvantages in using date-autoformatting, which I've capped here:
Removal has generally been met with positive responses by editors. Does anyone object if I remove it from the main text in a few days’ time on a trial basis? The original input formatting would be seen by all WPians, not just the huge number of visitors; it would be plain, unobtrusive text, which would give greater prominence to the high-value links. Tony (talk) 11:44, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi, is this an article by the regime? "Certain elements" use the right flag... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.2.165.141 ( talk) 20:02, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
The flag image in the lead is the 2012 design. It is not what was approved in 1995. It is similar to that, but it is a design which has had no official status until this year. It is not a design that was changed in 2012, it is a design that did not exist until 2012. The flag that was adopted in 1995 had a white margin either side of the red pattern, and that is not what is shown here. Kevin McE ( talk) 20:15, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
I have to agree with Zscout370 that this is a refinement of the design, not a complete change. If we took Kevin McE's approach then almost no flag older than ten years would have the correct date, as colours have been refined, flag shapes modified, lines thickened or narrowed, etc. none of which alter the basic design. One way of testing whether it is a new design or a refinement of an existing design is whether the average person on the street in the country concerned would notice the difference. In the case of Belarus I can confirm that Belarussians apparently don't notice the change as all the flags used at the Olympics in London are the old design and no one has complained! Incidentally the image on Wikipedia is slightly wrong as it omits the 1/189th of the flag length red stripe at the hoist. It is clearly shown on the specification diagram at Flag Specifcation at The State Committee on Standardization of the Republic of Belarus GrahamPadruig ( talk) 19:59, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
I feel the sentence should be added: The current ornamental pattern lacks, among other things, crosses easily visible even on the flag used in Soviet Union. This seems important to me as those differences are easily seen while comparing flags (the Soviet design, 1995-2012 design, current design) seen in the current article. Simply speaking, the current ornament pattern is greatly different from 1995-2012 pattern.
It would be nice to have any clear-cut explanation of this perplexing and intriguing issue. I simply do not understand why my editing regarding this is repetitively removed from both pl.wiki and en.wiki. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.11.177.39 ( talk) 18:52, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
I will do my best to be precise then. Crosses are visible within small rombs (two columns of four rombs) on both Soviet and 1995-2012 designs. These crosses are missing on current design. It seems to me that this is not a matter of optical delusion or simple widening of the pattern. If I am right the question is why it happened? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.11.33.153 ( talk) 17:00, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
Still, it is sad to me that these crosses are missing from the current design. Anything wrong with the crosses or what? Even for Soviets they were OK, but nowadays it is better to have them replaced? It's beyond my comprehension, really! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.11.142.233 ( talk) 16:01, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
It might be as you suggest, but do you have any idea why it was decided in 2012 that the way of design displaying rally needs to be changed. In what way it is more convenient than previous displays? Also, have in mind that all parts of ornamental pattern apparently have important spiritual/ideologic meaning attached to them, this is not simply a matter of decoration. = So the change of way of displaing might mean that spiritual meaning also changed. So again the question is why. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.11.117.223 ( talk) 05:39, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
OK, If you find anything definitive on why it was decided in 2012 that the ornamental pattern, apparently of folk origin and carrying important symbolic/spiritual messages characterizing the mentality of Belarus people as decribed in this wiki article, needs changes, share your knowledge with readers like me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.23.9.207 ( talk) 10:46, 16 November 2013 (UTC) Just to expand previous entry. Detailed description of the symbolic meaning of the decorative pattern can be found in pl.wiki article on Belarus flag. Again, why it was decided in 2012 to change the way of this pattern display.
According to One Europe - 100 Nations by Roy N. Pedersen (1992, Channel View Books, ISBN 1-85359-123-8): "On achieving independence, Belorussia briefly had a plain white flag, replaced in 1917 by the white-red-white flag ...". Domhnallbeag ( talk) 17:53, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
in section Similar flags the Flag of Arauca is different than the flag Arauca page — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.179.18.118 ( talk) 07:55, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
The link is wrong, The Arauca city flag is different from the Arauca Department flag — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.179.18.118 ( talk) 08:01, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Flag of Belarus. 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) 05:15, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 8 external links on Flag of Belarus. 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) 06:32, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
This article has been chunked up with images causing MOS:SANDWICH; in a Featured article, this should be addressed to retain status. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 17:32, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
@ Zscout370: SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 17:33, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The photo in the infobox, should be changed from Flag_of_Belarus_(1918,_1991–1995).svg to Flag_of_Belarus.svg. The white-red-white flag is not the current national flag, and this can cause confusion.( talk) 23:34, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
This article is listed as Featured, but it does not meet the WP:FARC. This article is not in good enough shape, as after comparison, it definitely does not match the level of other FA-class flag articles like Flag of Canada, Flag of India, Flag of Japan, Flag of Singapore. There needs to be improvement/expansion/creation of protocol, related flags and symbolism sections in the article Flag of Belarus. Compared to the other FA-class articles on national flags, this article also lacks a construction sheet, which is rather important. (posted this here at the suggestion of Z1720 at WT:URFA/2020 on 11 April 2022).-- Cukrakalnis ( talk) 11:08, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
Hi, @ Matthiaspaul. I noticed that you added "The white-red-white flag also gave inspiration to the white-blue-white flag used in the 2022 anti-war protests in Russia" to this article, but didn't provide a source. Could you please give your source for this statement? Thanks. Tol ( talk | contribs) @ 21:49, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
Why do we have the historical white-red-white flag in the infobox? This seems strange as other flag-based articles dont have this. They might have a variant flag, but not a historical flag, we should remove it, and keep it in the historical flags section.
~~~ LuNaCy ( talk) 18:07, 9 September 2022 (UTC)