This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
How could an anon user be allowed to a add wikiproject template? Isn't that a job for a registered and contributing member of that wikiproject? It's just a thought... -- Maurice27 00:21, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
Maurice27, rude unbeliver, by WP:Verifiability (please read it) the threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is not truth but verifiability. In your case, saying that 2:3 are official is not verifiable and neither a truth, because anywhere in Valencian law it isn't saying to be 2:3. Instead, it's verifiable that 1:2 and 2:3 are used both nowadays. But it's also verifiable that these are being used in different way, the 1:2 is always hoisted at top and, specially, in very historical simbols of Valencia. Also he have sources of 1:2 used before 1982, but until now there are no source for 2:3. In th other hand the 2:3 is used in a common and general way because of mimesis to proportions of the other two flag used on official buildings, the Spanish one and the European one. So these verifiable facts implies that Valencian crowned senyera in 1:2 is traditional, more majestic, as it's always hoisted at top, because the official regulation states that the flag must never touch the ground or floor. Both are used, but 1:2 is more representative. -- Benimerin - كُنْ ذكورا إذا كُنْت كذوب - 09:49, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Benimerin (aka Joanot), you have been already proven in Valencian Community talk-page to be wrong and you keep reverting sourced and referenced edits on this article also. In addition, the reasons given by you are completely uncyclopedic. If you keep reverting you will be reported. Since you created your new account, you haven't done a single edit outside this valencian flag matter (see [1]). You may believe to be a paladin of the truth in this matter, but the worst thing is that you are backing your point with erroneous edits:
On my part, I have given sources like:
- The Palau de la Generalitat. Here( [2] and here [3])
- The Council of Alcoy. Here ( [4]). Even if not deployed, picture is taken so close that is very easy to compare the length and width with the flag of Alcoy (a 2:3 flag see: [5]).
- The Spanish Senate. Here ( [6]). It can be clearly seen that the valencian flag (6th from left to right) has exactly the same length and width as all the others, excepth for the Ikurriña which has 14:25 proportions (half way between 2:3 and 1:2)
Why would the Valencian government make a law asking to its municipalities to have preferabily 2:3 flags if the community flag was to be 1:2?
I would like to point out that it is possible to a territory to have an unofficial flag in addition to the official. The very same European Union has an unofficial alternative flag with a ratio of 3:7, rather than 2:3, in the Strasbourg hemicycle. (see: [8]). This doesn't mean that both european flags ( 2:3 and 3:7) have to become a de facto version of each other as Benimerian is trying to oblige us to believe.
I sincerely doubt that any other matter in dispute in wikipedia worldwide has more sources, references or proofs that the ones I have contributed with. ONLY flags hoisted in official buildings (legislative, executive and/or judiciary branches) in Spain do have an strict protocolary code. (see: Use of the Spanish flag and other ensigns. Ministerio de Asuntos exteriores y Cooperación)
This is the second time I have to engage in a edit war with you because of this matter. I will copy/paste this paragraph in the WP:HV so that other users with interests and knowledge about flags may control and improve this article while preventing unbased edits like yours, which fall into WP:OWN, WP:V and WP:3RR (as explained by me to an admin here: [9])
-- Maurice27 11:38, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Again, you are exposing completely unverified and/or invented arguments. Flags with different proportions can very well be hoisted aside like in the UN, NATO or EU. (see flags hoisted in the UN). You are starting to become an edit war specialised user who don't care about sources, references and opinion from other users. 3 other users apart me have expressed their opinions that, following the sources given by me, 2:3 proportions are the ones. You have already been reported for WP:3RR. I will, again, undo your edit to leave the one with sources. If reverting again, you will be reported for preventing WP:V (you are erasing sources given by me) and WP:NOR (your theory that 1:2 is more "representative"), apart that your countinuous edit warring. -- Maurice27 13:54, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
Ooops! I left my opinion at User:Maurice27 talk page instead of posting it here. Anyway, it seems that there are two usages of flags but, as i explained there, sourced materiel prevails over unsourced one. WP:V is one of our core policies and it should be resepcted. I had offered a middle ground; leaving the sourced 2:3 while adding a footnote explaining that 1:2 is also used and how/why, etc... -- FayssalF - Wiki me up® 22:41, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
That the 1:2 is also used, was already done, but still I added that is commonly used ( [10]). As for the how and why... it remains a mistery... -- Maurice27 23:32, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
You are erroneously using symbols which you don't know:
But, I have sources, I have references, I'm not inventing arguments ( WP:V, I have 5 other users agreeing with me, I'm not a sock puppeteer, I haven't broke 3 times in a week the 3RR... etc..etc... Sincerely, Joanot, it is up to you to continue digging your hole. Meanwhile I'm keeping record of everything -- Maurice27 23:19, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
I was asked to watch over the article. Pretty much, is the only issue dealing with the ratio of the flag? User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 23:40, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
Absolutly. What Benimerin does not understand is that to fly a smaller or bigger flag, you don't change the ratios! You just make it bigger or smaller. About me erasing references by Joanot, I beg you to read some of my edits' references in order to find out who's the one erasing. BTW, the book I used as reference and of which I included a picture as I have it at home, showing clearly a 2:3 flag, is the same book used as reference at FOTW presented by Santiago Dotor, 11 December 1998 -- Maurice27 06:16, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
No, not my "personal interpretation"... You know very well that 4 other users, apart me, have agreed to that point on my talk-page. And you know it very well as you have answered to them in the very same talk page. You are the only one to say that this decree is worthless, the only one.
About the "decree related to valencian flag", as you name it, is none other than the Statute of Autonomy. If you are trying to say that I am ignoring it, may I remind you that I already used it as a reference 9 minutes after I created the article? This is the third time you accuse me of falsities, and the third time I prove you to be wrong, and counting... At least you admitted you were using "personal interpretation in the consideration of traditional or modern of each variant"... That's a start, you're on the good way.
Are you done preventing good faith users to improve the article? or you will keep accusing of falsities? -- Maurice27 10:12, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
Any of these is an official (government) building like the Palau de la Generalitat, Council of Alcoy, Spanis Senate, which all do hoist 2:3 flags, and which you are taking care of erasing from the references section as fast as possible...
BTW, this is what the users answered me. Parts which you didn't add before (funny on your part):
(translation: the standart measures are 2:3[...]This means that, if not stated the contrary[...] those are the proportions to be used.)
(Translation: decree 116/1994[...] 2:3 proportions[...] Following this legislation for municipalities flags, I'll hardly understand the autonomous to be different.)
(Translation: We give more weight to any material with sources, for which i can not back up something which does not have any source and only believes in occasional uses. I'm backing totally Maurice's version obviously)
Benimerin, you gotta be kiding us. I can't find another explanation. Are you trying to say that I am lying about what other user said??? even when it is registered and logged???
In addition, I will quote both links described by you above, as you accuse me of "ignore continously the decree related to Valencian flag":
-Artículo 5 -Punto Uno. La tradicional señera de la Comunidad Valenciana está compuesta por cuatro barras rojas sobre fondo amarillo, coronadas sobre franja azul junto al asta.
-TÍTULO I (De la bandera) -Artículo 2: La Bandera de la Comunidad Valenciana es la tradicional «Senyera» compuesta por cuatro barras rojas sobre fondo amarillo, coronadas sobre franja azul junto al asta.
They say the same thing! Exactly word by word. Ask yourself... How could the text of law by a government state another thing that its very own statute?
And do I ignore it? As far as I'm concerned, this very same text, obviously translated to english, is what became the very first lead paragraph since the very first edit to create the article at 20:01, 9 July 2007: "The flag of the Valencian Community is the traditional Valencian crowned Senyera, composed of four red bars on a yellow background, crowned with a blue strip party per pale next to the spear with 1/4 of the total length." (see Creation of the article)
Any other false accusation claiming I didn't include what laws say about the flag?
If I'm " a blind person", you have to be probably illiterate yourself. -- Maurice27 11:37, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
May this section be used to explain that the erasing by Benimerin of the book "Banderas de España" as a source/reference is completely unjustified. The book is also a reference at FOTW, which proves the quality and veracity of the content. An exhaustive research about all the flags in the history of Spain. The only problem (for Benimerin) is that it has a 2:3 flag. -- Maurice27 16:19, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
Sorry for my bad english. I think that the name of the article must be the valencian one, Senyera Reial, not the castilian one. In these cases, of non-english realities, the most logical thing is to try the original name or the english name, but it has no sense to try a name in a third language. I hope I've been able to express what i mean. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.202.236.224 ( talk) 22:47, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
Correct proportions of Valencian Community flag are 2:3. References:
More references:
-- 85.60.46.105 ( talk) 01:54, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
(Replying to comment on section above)
This is the text in dispute
[32]:
The drawing uses a ratio of 2:3. The precious stones are -E-S-E-S- (E: emerald or green oval; S: sapphire or blue quatrefoil; each hyphen would represent a pearl or white circle), from bottom hoist to top. The width of the blue band (including the thin red stripe carrying the jewels) is about 1/5th of the fly. scanned picture of the book
And my rewording [33]:
Altought the law doesn't establish the exact proportions of the flag and no drawing of it is provided, the Calvo & Gràvalos' book shows a depiction of the flag with a ratio of 2:3. In that depiction, the width of the blue band (including the thin red stripe carrying the jewels) is about 1/5th of the fly. The precious stones appearing on the depiction are -E-S-E-S- (E: emerald or green oval; S: sapphire or blue quatrefoil; each hyphen would represent a pearl or white circle), from bottom hoist to top. scanned picture of the book
Benimerin, your complaint was this was not a drawing from the BOE but a personal drawing, so I changed the wording to address that issue, but you have removed it anyways with the same complaint.
You also say that it's "wrong and confused", but the wording used by Maurice is not his personal interpretation, it's the wording that Jaume Olle's page uses when citing this book on its page about the valencian community [34], and the book is written by Luís Grávalos González and José Luís Calvo Pérez who have written several books each on vexicology stuff, so they are probably reliable sources for what the flag looks like.
Benimerin, the wording was changed to make it clear that it's *not* a drawing from BOE, and the book is probably a reliable source. Give some good reasons for why the source shouldn't be used, or stop removing it. -- Enric Naval ( talk) 13:36, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
Talking about laws... On the section above, Jaume Ollé talks about law 8/94, and says "(full text available in "Banderas" issue 14, March 1995)". Unfortunately, I don't have access to that magazine, and the only thing I could find online is organic law 8/94 [42], but it only talks about Extremadura.
Can someone please indicate me the full name of the law so I can find an online version to use as source on the article? -- Enric Naval ( talk) 13:07, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
The article states that LL stands for
I think it should rather be "the loyalty [...] in two wars". Although I don't have a source to back it up, I learnt it this way. And if it was more than two wars, it would be easy to depict the letter "L" more than twice, wouldn't it? -- 81.202.71.127 ( talk) 21:26, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Could anyone add any source for the width of the blue strip? As far as I know, the law of symbols of the Valencian community doesn't mention this detail and, in fact, in public buildings you can find official flags of the community with very diverse widths for the blue strip. Where did this 1/4 thing, that the article claims, come from? Loqu ( talk) 22:43, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Flag of the Valencian Community. 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:
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 04:11, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Flag of the Valencian Community. 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) 23:50, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Flag of the Valencian Community. 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:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.just.gva.es/pls/civadapv/p_civis.detalle1?ent=0313600000&codigo=ente&codcat=03136&tabla=SIMBOLS&opcion=1&categoria=Municipi&escudo=ep%2F0313600000.gif&bandera=bp%2F0313600000.gif&denominacion=Vall+de+Gallinera&tit=S%EDmbols{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.just.gva.es/pls/civadapv/p_civis.detalle1?ent=1202100000&codigo=ente&codcat=12021&tabla=SIMBOLS&opcion=1&categoria=Municipi&escudo=ep%2F1202100000.gif&bandera=bp%2F1202100000.gif&denominacion=Betx%ED&tit=S%EDmbolsWhen 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) 01:05, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
How could an anon user be allowed to a add wikiproject template? Isn't that a job for a registered and contributing member of that wikiproject? It's just a thought... -- Maurice27 00:21, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
Maurice27, rude unbeliver, by WP:Verifiability (please read it) the threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is not truth but verifiability. In your case, saying that 2:3 are official is not verifiable and neither a truth, because anywhere in Valencian law it isn't saying to be 2:3. Instead, it's verifiable that 1:2 and 2:3 are used both nowadays. But it's also verifiable that these are being used in different way, the 1:2 is always hoisted at top and, specially, in very historical simbols of Valencia. Also he have sources of 1:2 used before 1982, but until now there are no source for 2:3. In th other hand the 2:3 is used in a common and general way because of mimesis to proportions of the other two flag used on official buildings, the Spanish one and the European one. So these verifiable facts implies that Valencian crowned senyera in 1:2 is traditional, more majestic, as it's always hoisted at top, because the official regulation states that the flag must never touch the ground or floor. Both are used, but 1:2 is more representative. -- Benimerin - كُنْ ذكورا إذا كُنْت كذوب - 09:49, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Benimerin (aka Joanot), you have been already proven in Valencian Community talk-page to be wrong and you keep reverting sourced and referenced edits on this article also. In addition, the reasons given by you are completely uncyclopedic. If you keep reverting you will be reported. Since you created your new account, you haven't done a single edit outside this valencian flag matter (see [1]). You may believe to be a paladin of the truth in this matter, but the worst thing is that you are backing your point with erroneous edits:
On my part, I have given sources like:
- The Palau de la Generalitat. Here( [2] and here [3])
- The Council of Alcoy. Here ( [4]). Even if not deployed, picture is taken so close that is very easy to compare the length and width with the flag of Alcoy (a 2:3 flag see: [5]).
- The Spanish Senate. Here ( [6]). It can be clearly seen that the valencian flag (6th from left to right) has exactly the same length and width as all the others, excepth for the Ikurriña which has 14:25 proportions (half way between 2:3 and 1:2)
Why would the Valencian government make a law asking to its municipalities to have preferabily 2:3 flags if the community flag was to be 1:2?
I would like to point out that it is possible to a territory to have an unofficial flag in addition to the official. The very same European Union has an unofficial alternative flag with a ratio of 3:7, rather than 2:3, in the Strasbourg hemicycle. (see: [8]). This doesn't mean that both european flags ( 2:3 and 3:7) have to become a de facto version of each other as Benimerian is trying to oblige us to believe.
I sincerely doubt that any other matter in dispute in wikipedia worldwide has more sources, references or proofs that the ones I have contributed with. ONLY flags hoisted in official buildings (legislative, executive and/or judiciary branches) in Spain do have an strict protocolary code. (see: Use of the Spanish flag and other ensigns. Ministerio de Asuntos exteriores y Cooperación)
This is the second time I have to engage in a edit war with you because of this matter. I will copy/paste this paragraph in the WP:HV so that other users with interests and knowledge about flags may control and improve this article while preventing unbased edits like yours, which fall into WP:OWN, WP:V and WP:3RR (as explained by me to an admin here: [9])
-- Maurice27 11:38, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Again, you are exposing completely unverified and/or invented arguments. Flags with different proportions can very well be hoisted aside like in the UN, NATO or EU. (see flags hoisted in the UN). You are starting to become an edit war specialised user who don't care about sources, references and opinion from other users. 3 other users apart me have expressed their opinions that, following the sources given by me, 2:3 proportions are the ones. You have already been reported for WP:3RR. I will, again, undo your edit to leave the one with sources. If reverting again, you will be reported for preventing WP:V (you are erasing sources given by me) and WP:NOR (your theory that 1:2 is more "representative"), apart that your countinuous edit warring. -- Maurice27 13:54, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
Ooops! I left my opinion at User:Maurice27 talk page instead of posting it here. Anyway, it seems that there are two usages of flags but, as i explained there, sourced materiel prevails over unsourced one. WP:V is one of our core policies and it should be resepcted. I had offered a middle ground; leaving the sourced 2:3 while adding a footnote explaining that 1:2 is also used and how/why, etc... -- FayssalF - Wiki me up® 22:41, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
That the 1:2 is also used, was already done, but still I added that is commonly used ( [10]). As for the how and why... it remains a mistery... -- Maurice27 23:32, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
You are erroneously using symbols which you don't know:
But, I have sources, I have references, I'm not inventing arguments ( WP:V, I have 5 other users agreeing with me, I'm not a sock puppeteer, I haven't broke 3 times in a week the 3RR... etc..etc... Sincerely, Joanot, it is up to you to continue digging your hole. Meanwhile I'm keeping record of everything -- Maurice27 23:19, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
I was asked to watch over the article. Pretty much, is the only issue dealing with the ratio of the flag? User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 23:40, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
Absolutly. What Benimerin does not understand is that to fly a smaller or bigger flag, you don't change the ratios! You just make it bigger or smaller. About me erasing references by Joanot, I beg you to read some of my edits' references in order to find out who's the one erasing. BTW, the book I used as reference and of which I included a picture as I have it at home, showing clearly a 2:3 flag, is the same book used as reference at FOTW presented by Santiago Dotor, 11 December 1998 -- Maurice27 06:16, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
No, not my "personal interpretation"... You know very well that 4 other users, apart me, have agreed to that point on my talk-page. And you know it very well as you have answered to them in the very same talk page. You are the only one to say that this decree is worthless, the only one.
About the "decree related to valencian flag", as you name it, is none other than the Statute of Autonomy. If you are trying to say that I am ignoring it, may I remind you that I already used it as a reference 9 minutes after I created the article? This is the third time you accuse me of falsities, and the third time I prove you to be wrong, and counting... At least you admitted you were using "personal interpretation in the consideration of traditional or modern of each variant"... That's a start, you're on the good way.
Are you done preventing good faith users to improve the article? or you will keep accusing of falsities? -- Maurice27 10:12, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
Any of these is an official (government) building like the Palau de la Generalitat, Council of Alcoy, Spanis Senate, which all do hoist 2:3 flags, and which you are taking care of erasing from the references section as fast as possible...
BTW, this is what the users answered me. Parts which you didn't add before (funny on your part):
(translation: the standart measures are 2:3[...]This means that, if not stated the contrary[...] those are the proportions to be used.)
(Translation: decree 116/1994[...] 2:3 proportions[...] Following this legislation for municipalities flags, I'll hardly understand the autonomous to be different.)
(Translation: We give more weight to any material with sources, for which i can not back up something which does not have any source and only believes in occasional uses. I'm backing totally Maurice's version obviously)
Benimerin, you gotta be kiding us. I can't find another explanation. Are you trying to say that I am lying about what other user said??? even when it is registered and logged???
In addition, I will quote both links described by you above, as you accuse me of "ignore continously the decree related to Valencian flag":
-Artículo 5 -Punto Uno. La tradicional señera de la Comunidad Valenciana está compuesta por cuatro barras rojas sobre fondo amarillo, coronadas sobre franja azul junto al asta.
-TÍTULO I (De la bandera) -Artículo 2: La Bandera de la Comunidad Valenciana es la tradicional «Senyera» compuesta por cuatro barras rojas sobre fondo amarillo, coronadas sobre franja azul junto al asta.
They say the same thing! Exactly word by word. Ask yourself... How could the text of law by a government state another thing that its very own statute?
And do I ignore it? As far as I'm concerned, this very same text, obviously translated to english, is what became the very first lead paragraph since the very first edit to create the article at 20:01, 9 July 2007: "The flag of the Valencian Community is the traditional Valencian crowned Senyera, composed of four red bars on a yellow background, crowned with a blue strip party per pale next to the spear with 1/4 of the total length." (see Creation of the article)
Any other false accusation claiming I didn't include what laws say about the flag?
If I'm " a blind person", you have to be probably illiterate yourself. -- Maurice27 11:37, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
May this section be used to explain that the erasing by Benimerin of the book "Banderas de España" as a source/reference is completely unjustified. The book is also a reference at FOTW, which proves the quality and veracity of the content. An exhaustive research about all the flags in the history of Spain. The only problem (for Benimerin) is that it has a 2:3 flag. -- Maurice27 16:19, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
Sorry for my bad english. I think that the name of the article must be the valencian one, Senyera Reial, not the castilian one. In these cases, of non-english realities, the most logical thing is to try the original name or the english name, but it has no sense to try a name in a third language. I hope I've been able to express what i mean. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.202.236.224 ( talk) 22:47, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
Correct proportions of Valencian Community flag are 2:3. References:
More references:
-- 85.60.46.105 ( talk) 01:54, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
(Replying to comment on section above)
This is the text in dispute
[32]:
The drawing uses a ratio of 2:3. The precious stones are -E-S-E-S- (E: emerald or green oval; S: sapphire or blue quatrefoil; each hyphen would represent a pearl or white circle), from bottom hoist to top. The width of the blue band (including the thin red stripe carrying the jewels) is about 1/5th of the fly. scanned picture of the book
And my rewording [33]:
Altought the law doesn't establish the exact proportions of the flag and no drawing of it is provided, the Calvo & Gràvalos' book shows a depiction of the flag with a ratio of 2:3. In that depiction, the width of the blue band (including the thin red stripe carrying the jewels) is about 1/5th of the fly. The precious stones appearing on the depiction are -E-S-E-S- (E: emerald or green oval; S: sapphire or blue quatrefoil; each hyphen would represent a pearl or white circle), from bottom hoist to top. scanned picture of the book
Benimerin, your complaint was this was not a drawing from the BOE but a personal drawing, so I changed the wording to address that issue, but you have removed it anyways with the same complaint.
You also say that it's "wrong and confused", but the wording used by Maurice is not his personal interpretation, it's the wording that Jaume Olle's page uses when citing this book on its page about the valencian community [34], and the book is written by Luís Grávalos González and José Luís Calvo Pérez who have written several books each on vexicology stuff, so they are probably reliable sources for what the flag looks like.
Benimerin, the wording was changed to make it clear that it's *not* a drawing from BOE, and the book is probably a reliable source. Give some good reasons for why the source shouldn't be used, or stop removing it. -- Enric Naval ( talk) 13:36, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
Talking about laws... On the section above, Jaume Ollé talks about law 8/94, and says "(full text available in "Banderas" issue 14, March 1995)". Unfortunately, I don't have access to that magazine, and the only thing I could find online is organic law 8/94 [42], but it only talks about Extremadura.
Can someone please indicate me the full name of the law so I can find an online version to use as source on the article? -- Enric Naval ( talk) 13:07, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
The article states that LL stands for
I think it should rather be "the loyalty [...] in two wars". Although I don't have a source to back it up, I learnt it this way. And if it was more than two wars, it would be easy to depict the letter "L" more than twice, wouldn't it? -- 81.202.71.127 ( talk) 21:26, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Could anyone add any source for the width of the blue strip? As far as I know, the law of symbols of the Valencian community doesn't mention this detail and, in fact, in public buildings you can find official flags of the community with very diverse widths for the blue strip. Where did this 1/4 thing, that the article claims, come from? Loqu ( talk) 22:43, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Flag of the Valencian Community. 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:
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 04:11, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Flag of the Valencian Community. 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) 23:50, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Flag of the Valencian Community. 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:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.just.gva.es/pls/civadapv/p_civis.detalle1?ent=0313600000&codigo=ente&codcat=03136&tabla=SIMBOLS&opcion=1&categoria=Municipi&escudo=ep%2F0313600000.gif&bandera=bp%2F0313600000.gif&denominacion=Vall+de+Gallinera&tit=S%EDmbols{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.just.gva.es/pls/civadapv/p_civis.detalle1?ent=1202100000&codigo=ente&codcat=12021&tabla=SIMBOLS&opcion=1&categoria=Municipi&escudo=ep%2F1202100000.gif&bandera=bp%2F1202100000.gif&denominacion=Betx%ED&tit=S%EDmbolsWhen 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) 01:05, 2 October 2017 (UTC)