Jump to content

Talk:Flag of New England

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Blue Ensign

[edit]

It strikes me how similar the blue version of the New England flag is to the 17th century Blue Ensign. If the blue NE is anything more than a woodcarvers error, I would suspect the two flags to be directly related. Mingusboodle (talk) 16:58, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good point. This seems to be a logical explanation why it was rendered the way it has. I would love to hear a experts opinion on the matter. -DevinCook (talk) 04:56, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New England Revolution usage

[edit]

I wasn't sure whether or not this should go in a new section on the actual page or not, but it might be worth noting that MLS' New England Revolution have adopted a variant of the Trumbull flag on the back collars of their 2012 jersey designs, as noted here. (There's a better example of how the flag looks in one of the pics on this page, though.) --Nerroth (talk) 07:41, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, they're simply using the 3rd Flag of New England (just called the Flag of New England during the Revolutionary War in the article). I think it's an important note, but as a member of one of the Revs organized Supporters Groups, I feel like I should let someone else handle whether or not that's worthy for inclusion. Achowat (talk) 12:16, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Worthy of inclusion in the article, as an example of modern usage. The first link would make a good citation. Canute (talk) 18:21, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Myth?

[edit]

I don't see any reliable secondary sources here. Just personal web pages of the artists who invented these flags. No published book, article seems to mention any of them---and no historical museum shows any of them. Rjensen (talk) 04:30, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

First off, whatever the problem may be, removing all images from the article is not the solution to anything, so please don't do that again.
Second, the only flag invented in the modern era, is the NEGC flag. Some of the flags have semi-dubious historical status, but such questions about historicity and/or official status are of long standing (a century or more), and are really not because they were invented by "web-page artists"[sic] (whatever that means). I have the Furlong and McCandless book (which contains quite a bit of info on early New England flags) right here, and if you require any sourcing on a specific point which is covered in the book, I can add it... AnonMoos (talk) 21:44, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
All Wikipedia articles have to be based on reliable secondary sources--and the images fail that critical test. they are one person's inventions. Let's see the explicit reliable source before parading these 21st century inventions. They do not appear in google in connection with any historical society or official agency--all links are back to the modern artist who claims to have invented hundreds of flags. Rjensen (talk) 05:29, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately for you, you appear to have almost no knowledge whatsoever of the subject matter of the article which you want to perform crude radical surgery on. The great majority of these flags (except for the NEGC flag, of course), appear in the Furlong and McCandless book (ISBN 0-87474-449-0), which I have conveniently at hand (in fact, several of the flags appear right on the front cover of the book). This book was published in 1981, which appears to be before the 21st century, and before Google was founded (and in fact the authors died in 1967 and 1976, so the book was published posthumously); therefore your blanket sweeping unsupported assertions above would appear to be merely so much ignorant bullshit which is completely useless for improving Wikipedia.
If you have any SPECIFIC questions about particular details, I would be glad to look them up in the Furlong and McCandless book. However, your crude hack-and-slash operations on the article serve no valid purpose whatsoever (and in fact appear to border on vandalism), so don't repeat them. AnonMoos (talk) 05:54, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Actually I have a Yale PhD and was a Harvard Professor and have done a lot of work in New England archives, museums & historical societies. None support these mystery flags. In any case the solution is to provide explicit references to reliable secondary sources for all the flags shown. Rjensen (talk) 06:42, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It's rather unfortunate for all concerned that you haven't been able to apply your formal scholastic credentials in any way that is useful for the improvement of this article. Your tagging of files in the image gallery is misplaced and useless, since files in flag image galleries are not normally footnoted, and there are descriptions of these flags (often cited) in the article text directly above. I left in place the "fact" tag which was not in the image gallery -- however, placing a {{fact}} template right next to a <ref>...</ref> is not ordinary or recommended procedure on Wikipeia... AnonMoos (talk) 07:04, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

yet again another time around

[edit]

Rjensen insists that all these flags were invented in the 2010s, while I have in my physical possession a well-respected book published in 1981 (and already referenced several times in this article) which pretty conclusively demonstrates that Rjensen doesn't have the slightest fricken clue what he's talking about. Yet somehow we have to go around and around and around yet again dealing with Rjensen's indiscriminate hatred of all images in this article, despite the fact that Rjensen hasn't been able to come up with any specific valid reasons to question any of them. My advice for Rjensen is:
1) If you have any SPECIFIC factual questions on any particular historical details of New England flags, then I can try to look these up in suitable sources. However, the "2010s hypothesis" is absurd fringe nonsense, and I'm not under any obligation to debunk it as a whole, any more than articles on map projections are obligated to include a debunking of the Flat Earth theory.
2) Files in flag image galleries are not normally footnoted, therefore tagging of such images is not reasonable or constructive. The flags are described in the text above the gallery, where the footnotes are. If you have any SPECIFIC factual issues with the details of such text descriptions, then I can try to deal with such -- but adding drive-by tagging to each and every image in the article indiscriminately serves no valid useful purpose, and so is pretty much tantamount to vandalism. AnonMoos (talk) 00:21, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

latest semi-pointless edits

[edit]

There has never been a formally officially adopted flag of New England, but for many decades versions of British flags, and modified variants of British flags were flown by ships sailing out of new England ports (most often by Massachusetts ships, but not necessarily by them exclusively). With the coming of the revolution, there were attempts to de-Britticize some of these flags. James II's unified New England colony only lasted a few years and did not have any official flag, so I'm not sure what the great relevance of it for this article is. If you think that the various struggles between James II and the Massachusetts etc. government were the catalyst for the creation and usage of the original pine tree flag, then please find a way of saying so without randomly slashing out large sections of this article. `AnonMoos (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 14:54, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Flag of New England. 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).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 15:16, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Flag of New England. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:37, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Usage of the flag term Defacement

[edit]

I've seen an edit in which the term "defaced with" has been used to describe the Ebinger Flag. It was removed as "vandalism" by 67.85.14.30 on 9/30/17. As the wiki page for "defacement" says, it has no negative connotations, and indicates a different owner. I think for the Ebinger situation this is a perfect descriptor, considering that the flag was originally owned by all, and the new flag owned by he with the addition of the six stars. Why has the defacement term been removed? clinically lazy (talk) 02:26, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't been closely monitoring the article recently. Perhaps linking the term to Defacement (flag) could avoid such problems in future? AnonMoos (talk) 14:34, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:07, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Flag_of_New_England&oldid=1202038754"