Commons:Valued image candidates/AU NavalEnsignHalfMast.JPG/Archive of previous reviews

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

2nd review (2016) = Comment In Commonwealth countries , the correct scope wording must be at half mast, not 'half-staff', and definitely not 'Invisible flag of death'. Charles (talk) 10:13, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • In response to "half-mast" vs "half-staff" - I had accidently had a ":en" to the scope name. I have now corrected that and the scope maps onto a valid commons category over which I have no control.
  • In response to your comments regarding the "invisible flag of death", please visit :en:Half-mast for a full explanation. Please also note that the page Commons:Valued image scope states quite clearly - "...scope is not a simple description of your image. Rather, it defines a generic field or category within which your image is the most valuable example. In this case, the image depicts the mast-mast variant where the space above the flag is designed to accommodate the "invisible flag of death", rather than the variant where the flag is exactly half-way down the flag-pole. I have also changed the citation in the image under submission so that it no longer points to a dead link.
Martinvl (talk) 19:43, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Speculation is no basis for a scope. You can easily rename the incorrect category Flags at half-staff in Australia to half-mast. The link on the half-mast page reference 3 is broken. Also, do you have any evidence that the authorities chose to fly the ensign in the specific position you claim? [:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Half-mast] Charles (talk) 09:40, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Charlesjsharp:
  • If you visit :Category:Flags at half staff by country, you will see that in order change "Category:Flags at half-staff in Australia" to "Category:Flags at half-mast in Australia" and to still maintain the category naming convention would be a major renaming exercise which could well trigger a UK-English vs US-ENglish edit war. This change is not going to happen.
  • Yes, I know that Reference 3 in the WIkipedia article is a dead link - that is why I added a citation to the file that is now being submitted as a VI. If you feel strongly about it, you can amend the Wikipedia article yourself. As things stand, the background to the "invisible flag of death" is well documented.
  • I make no assertion about why the flag was flown in this manner at that time and place, that is left up to the reader. However it is an indisputable fact that on the day that I took the picture, Rusty Priest was given a state funeral at a location less than 2 km away (See newspaper artcile that is linked to the name "Rusty Priest" in the article.
Martinvl (talk) 10:53, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Result: 0 support, 0 oppose =>
undecided. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:47, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

1st review (2015) =

Scope changed from Flag at half mast to Flag at half-staff in Australia --Martinvl (talk) 17:40, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Please notify previous voters of this change. Remember: "A support vote that was made before a change of scope is not counted unless it is reconfirmed afterwards; an oppose vote is counted unless it is changed or withdrawn".
@Charlesjsharp I disagree. There are three traditions for flying a flag at a time of mourning:
  • Literally half way up the flag-pole
  • One flag width from the top of the pole (making way for the invisible flag of death)
  • Attaching black ribbons to the flag.
The purpose of this image was to illustrate the second of these traditions. The actual flag in the illustration is of little consequence. Possibly the scope could be "Invisible flag of death"? Comments? Martinvl (talk) 22:53, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Scope changed from Flag at half-staff in Australia to Invisible flag of death --Martinvl (talk) 20:41, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Please notify previous voters of this change. Remember: "A support vote that was made before a change of scope is not counted unless it is reconfirmed afterwards; an oppose vote is counted unless it is changed or withdrawn".
Result: 0 support, 1 oppose =>
declined. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:20, 12 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Valued_image_candidates/AU_NavalEnsignHalfMast.JPG/Archive_of_previous_reviews&oldid=654970089"