Jump to content

Talk:Pan-Arab colors

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

Southern Sudan and Somaliland flags

[edit]

There is no evidence about pan-arab signification on both Southern Sudan and Somaliland flags SomalilandSouthern Sudan


actually the Somaliland Flag is an almost exact replica of the old Yemenish Flag, but with colors changed.

Arab League User (talk) 18:27, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Afghanistan

[edit]

The flag of Afghanistan is surely another example:

-- Tom Anderson 2008-01-22 2002 +0000 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.40.81.23 (talk) 20:02, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Afghanistan are not Arab. Mussav (talk) 22:08, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hope your kidding, those colours are completely different nor is Afghanistan an Arab nation. Akmal94 (talk) 02:53, 31 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Afghanistan is not an Arab country, but it does use all Pan-Arab colours. For this reason, it would be beneficial to add a footnote somewhere for why it is not listed. BrendonTheWizard (talk) 02:26, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Are you trolling or what? The Afghan flag does not use Pan-Arab colours, it has black, red and green and the emblem doesn't count. The flag itself was inspired by the Tri-colours of the German flag when King Amanullah Khan visited Germany in 1928. So no, we are not going to add Afghanistan into the list because its flag is of completely different origins than that of the Pan-Arab flag. Akmal94 (talk) 01:31, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Inaccuracy in flags

[edit]

Where is Ahwaz? There is no country called Ahwaz. There is an Iranian city by the name Ahvaz. If there is a secessionist movement in that city or region, almost no one has heard of it. Also, the flag is not recognized anywhere. Either the picture needs to be taken off or a disclaimer needs to be added. mrjahan —Preceding comment was added at 21:18, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Countries This is not an article about countries, it is an article about Pan-Arab colors. If a flag has the Pan-Arab colors, it should be listed here. I can't speak for how acclaimed this flag of al-Ahwaz is, but if the flag should be deleted, nominate it. As long as it's on Wikipedia, it should be on this page. -Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:26, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I removed Ahwaz flag as per Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Flag_of_Al-Ahwaz. --Asteriontalk 14:54, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Andalucia

[edit]

In what possible sense is Andalucia's flag related to Pan Arab colours? It has Green & White in an unrelated pattern. While perhaps arguably tied back to Andalucia's Islamic heritage that does not make it "Pan Arab" I am removing. collounsbury (talk) 16:50, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lebanese Flag

[edit]

Eventhough the Lebanese flag contains red and green their meaning and reason of using them is not related in any way to the pan arabic colors —Preceding unsigned comment added by Atmleb (talk • contribs) 23:52, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Other countries

[edit]

How about the flags of other countries which also contain black, white, green, and red, like the Flag of South Africa? Does a country have to be considered an "Arab country" for its colors to be considered "pan-Arab colors"? --98.210.210.193 (talk) 07:02, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Those would most likely be Pan-Arab colors by coincidence. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 10:41, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'd add a "Non-Arab countries" section, at the very least to avoid it being up many times in the future. — MK (t/c) 15:59, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Flag of South Sudan

[edit]

Flag of South Sudan does not have Pan-Arab background but Pan_African meaning.Colors are similar but the meaning is completely different. The colours are said to represent the South Sudanese people (black), peace (white), the blood shed for freedom (red), the land (green) and the waters of the Nile (blue); the gold star, the Star of Bethlehem, represents unity of the states of South Sudan. So it should be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.148.44.228 (talk) 14:49, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Flag of Libya

[edit]

The flag of Libya since the 1951 - 1969 will be the official flag for Libya, which is under the Pan-Arab colors section. Please do not add the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya flag into the Arab Flags not using Pan-Arab colors section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 175.144.157.10 (talk) 07:51, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Former Arab flags; Ayyubids and the Mamluk Sultanate

[edit]

As far as we know, neither were ethnically Arab (see their respective pages). However, a certain user with the IP 109.146.36.38 claims that they became Arab (which apparently justifies their inclusion in this article). Unless sources that backs up these claims are provided, I plan to remove these two flags. Best, --Spivorg (talk) 17:35, 7 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Since there seems to be no objections, I'll be removing the flags. Best, --Spivorg (talk) 11:24, 19 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
As anyone with even elementary knowledge of Arab history can attest, numerous Arab dynasties were of foreign origin, as were many of the most celebrated heroes of the Arab nation. Nur-ad-Din, Saladin, Qutuz, Baibars, Muhammad Ali - Turkish, Kurdish, Persian, Turkish, Albanian - all had non-Arab origins, yet were embraced entirely as Arabs in the fullness of time. The foreign origin of a dynasty does not preclude its assimilation in the host country. Were that not the case, then the dynasties of the U.K., Belgium, the Netherlands, and Denmark would all be considered foreign, as they are of German origin. To go even further, the Plantagenets of England would be considered solely French, the Tudors solely Welsh, the Stuarts solely Scottish, and the subsequent dynastic houses solely German.
The extent to which Arab rulers of foreign origin are embraced as Arab is demonstrated aptly by the fact that the Eagle of Saladin has been used by several Arab states as their coats of arms, and is an abiding symbol of Arab nationalism.
Per WP:OR ("as anyone with even elementary knowledge of Arab history can attest" isn't an argument) these flags should be removed from this article, especially since these two states used yellow flags, which aren't linked to current pan-Arab colors. --Omar-toons (talk) 14:22, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Should these (non-national) flags be added to the article?

[edit]

Hello,

I would like to have editors' opinions about adding some non-national flags to this article:

Flags used by political parties and military organisations

Head of states standards

  • The royal standard of Jordan ;
  • The presidential standard of Egypt ;
  • The presidential standard of Sudan ;
  • The presidential standard of Syria ;
  • The presidential standard of the UAE.

Regards,
--Omar-toons (talk) 00:44, 30 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ba`th party is basically identical to Palestinian flag. Not sure presidential standards add much (and several of them contain irrelevant yellow or gold color). But the three-red-star flag is both historical (1932-1958, 1961-1963) and current... AnonMoos (talk) 21:45, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Flag of Libya (bis)

[edit]

Hello,

According to many sources, the current flag of Libya isn't linked by any way to Pan-Arabism, but is linked instead to Libya's own history and to the historical colors/flags of its provinces.[1] [2] [3]

Also, we can note that the official description on Libya's Constitution doesn't cite any Pan-Arab meaning for that flag. [4]

Thus, describing it as "with Pan-Arab colors" ir clearly WP:OR.

Regards,
--Omar-toons (talk) 23:30, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The edit history reveals that a seemingly French language source for the symbolism of the flag of Libya was added on 12 June 2014. I cannot comment on the nature of that source, however, it does offer the prospect of expanding this discussion.
Furthermore, it is NOT the case that the absence of a constitutional description of flag symbolism means that such symbolism does not exist. As the flag of Libya has been included on Pan-Arab colors for some time, the matter should be dealt with more carefully before a decision on whether or not to remove it is made. Had Omar-toons thought to use Talk earlier rather than continually reverting, perhaps this specific question could have been resolved much sooner. 2.28.240.160 (talk) 12:28, 15 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks to read WP:V
Regards,
Omar-toons (talk) 12:43, 15 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Seeking an end to edit warring

[edit]

The continual reverts by Omar-toons are causing immense disruption to this page. Now numbering around two dozen, these reverts by Omar-Toons have been aggressive, confrontational, and in very bad faith (including false accusations of sock puppetry).

It is necessary to address this problem now before any further disruption is caused.

Omar-toons edit warring is characterised by a combination of complete reverts, complete reverts plus new contentious edits, complete rejection of previously existing text or any linguistic improvements to intro text.

  1. [5]
  2. [6]
  3. [7]
  4. [8]
  5. [9]
  6. [10]
  7. [11]
  8. [12]
  9. [13]
  10. [14]
  11. [15]
  12. [16]
  13. [17]
  14. [18]
  15. [19]
  16. [20]
  17. [21]
  18. [22]
  19. [23]
  20. [24]
  21. [25]
  22. [26]

As Omar-toons' almost two dozen reverts demonstrate, he has adopted a very aggressive, bad faith and confrontational approach in an effort to force through his own edits in the absence of consensus. He rejects overtures to take the issues to Talk, and instead responds with false accusations of sock puppetry (without offering any evidence). After his edit warring was referred to as vandalism, he used that same term to refer to others who were attempting to conserve the existing text.

Page protection was requested yesterday (both for and against Omar-toons), however, Callanecc directed the issue to this noticeboard. The details for the page protection requests (which explain the substance of the problem) are below: 2.28.240.160 (talk) 11:56, 15 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing and adding of WP:OR information by a dynamic IP user (a user who claims that each IP is a different user, while it is clearly the same one) --Omar-toons (talk) 01:40, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This page does indeed need to be protected, but the protection required is from the disruptive edits of Omar-toons. This user has acted consistently in the following negative ways:
1) Refusing to seek consensus or even discuss matters in the Talk page, user has insisted on making sweeping edits to a page whose content had been settled for a very long period of time, namely Pan-Arab colors. When user was urged to use Talk for this purpose, he refused, only using Talk at a later stage for two very specific, peripheral page issues and not for the main essence of his page-wide edits.
2) Changing page intro text with no explanation, then consistently reverting any and all edits to the page intro (again, with no explanation). User is a non-native English speaker, and, while of course this should not preclude him editing on Wikipedia, it can lead to a poorer quality of prose. The page intro (as of the last edit), the one that user seeks to delete, was not composed by a single editor with a single edit, but collaboratively by users over numerous edits to reach its current state. The English is superior, the facts are better presented, and, as alluded to earlier, it is in line with the settled text that had existed for a long period of time. User has refused to explain any of his edits to the page intro, or raise them on Talk.
4) Accusations of OR. User has made these accusations repeatedly, but refused to expand upon them in the edit summaries of his reversions. One would imagine that if user was genuinely concerned with OR, to the extent that it motivates him to continually revert edits by anyone else, he would take pains to point out what the alleged OR is. Instead, user has chosen to edit war. The only element of which one can think is his assertion regarding the Flag of Libya, however, it is noted that a reference has been inserted for this, so user's motivation seems purely negative.
5) False accusations of sock puppetry. A user making use of a sock puppet is a serious offence, not merely because of the damaging effect that it can have on the editing process, but because of the breach of trust between that particular user and the rest of the Wikipedia community. By the same taken, accusing a user of making use of a sock puppet is an extremely serious charge, and should never be made lightly, or as a means of winning an edit war. Wikipedia editing rules prohibit a single user from making use of different accounts in order to get around things like the 3RR, and win edit wars. However, they do not prohibit several users who share the same view on the merits of particular edits to seek to protect those edits from disruptive users. Indeed, a collaborative approach to editing is one of the hallmarks of the Wikipedia process (when it is abided by). Rather than any sock puppetry, you will find that this is exactly what has happened in this instance. Perhaps if we check the geographical locations of all IP addresses from which edits to the Pan-Arab colors page have been edited, we may gather sufficient evidence to determine that it is impossible for any sock puppetry to have occurred (unless we intend to introduce a new rule that precludes more than one user editing from a single population centre, district, or neighbourhood. One suspects that Omar-Toons (the user in question) has already performed such an IP address check, and found no evidence to support his claims, which is why he has offered no evidence whatsoever.
In addition to an absolute absence of evidence, Omar-Toons has failed to offer an explanation of what purpose sock puppetry would serve in this instance. As far as a I can see, at no time has a single user (other than Omar-Toons himself) been close to any kind of violation of the Wikipedia rules in his or her own right that would require the use of a forbidden sock puppet. Again, the lack of explanation and evidence from Omar-Toons speaks volumes about the true intent of his accusations.
6) Edit warring. At a certain point in a dispute between several users, it becomes obvious to everyone operating in good faith that seeking an end to the dispute through the Talk page is essential. Aside from (at a late stage) the two peripheral issues already noted, Omar-Toons has refused to use the Talk page for this purpose, choosing instead to pursue an ill-tempered edit war. If genuine cooperation with other users was his desire, he simply would not have conducted himself in this fashion.
I am entirely confident that if one compares the different edits on the page, Omar-Toons' disruptive, bad faith misconduct shall be evident to all. Indeed, having briefly examined his behaviour on other pages, it seems that Omar-Toons has a habit of edit warring, and attempting to wear out other users through his consistent, disruptive edits. Moreover, if one compares the intro text of the last edit to intro text of Omar-Toons' edits, the difference in the quality of English, and in the way that the subject matter is discussed will also be obvious.
I ask for Omar-Toons to be sanctioned for the misconduct mentioned above, and for the page (as of the most recent non-Omar-Toons edit) to be protected.
Thank you. 2.28.240.160 (talk) 10:19, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

1959 Iraqi flag

[edit]
1959 Iraqi flag

Hello,

As I was reading Jasim Musawi's "Reading Iraq: Culture and Power in Conflict", the author says page 63 that the 1959 Iraqi flag wasn't linked to Pan-Arabism but the opposite: as it was instaured by the 1959 Iraqi nationalists, the flag was referring to Iraq's nationhood as opposed to Pan-Arabism.

Any refs to give the opposite statement, i.e. that 1959 Iraqi flag was linked to Pan-Arabism?

Regards,
--Omar-toons (talk) 00:40, 19 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You can read the comments on pages File:Flag of Iraq (1959-1963).svg and File:Iraq state emblem CoA 1959-1965 Qassem.svg. The flag technically included the four pan-Arab colors, but was chosen to specifically avoid Nasserite symbolism (vertical tricolor instead of horizontal, black-white-green instead of red-white-black, no eagle or hawk), and included a kind of sun-symbol with yellow in partial reference to the Kurds. P.S. "Instaur" is not a word of English... AnonMoos (talk) 12:38, 19 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I see, thanks for your comment...
--Omar-toons (talk) 13:25, 19 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Qualification only for flags that use all Arab colours simultaneously

[edit]

I have removed a number of flags actually which do not qualify (See recent edit log page). Reason is clear. I noticed that some flags used in gallery that do not contain all the Arab colours, but only three. These flags do not qualify. Why the gallery of flags utilizing three colours but omitting one. This is arbitrary use of criterion. If that is the case, why don't we have Lebanese flag that uses three colours (white, red, green) but omits the black. Lebanon is utilizing three colours, isn't it? Same with Oman. It has three colours (white red and green, but omits black). So why Oman and Lebanon are excluded? Yet Yemen (utilizing white red and black but excluding green) is included. What's so special about Yemen that does not apply to Oman or Lebanon? The case of some other flags was even more questionable. The gallery included flags with two or three Arab colours (not all four), but includes a non-Arab colour... These flags do not qualify either but on much stronger grounds. First, not all Arab colours are there Two They are using some other colour as well like light blue or yellow or as in case of Egypt gold. Egyptian flag is clearly not a flag utilizing all Arab colours. Having said that, I am in favour of opening a new section entitled "Current flags with partial usage of the four Pan-Arab colors". Three Arab colours would be one subsection, two Arab colours a second sub-section if you will. In such cases, Lebanon, Oman, Egypt, Yemen would qualify so as a number of other Arab former flags. As for flags with a non-Arab colour, I leave it to your judgement, but I am in favour of three Arab colour flag section at least werldwayd (talk) 16:21, 26 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the removed flags use the Arab Liberation colors mentioned in the lead. Unlike the red/green/white from the flags of Oman and Lebanon, the red/white/black tricolor used for the flags of Egypt, Yemen, South Yemen etc. is actually related to the Arab colors. The presence of yellow or blue charges does not invalidate the pan-Arab symbolism; you kept the 1959 Iraqi flag in the article, which also contains yellow. Flags that "coincidentally" use two, three or even all four pan-Arab colors should not be included; Hungary and Italy have as much "right" to be in your proposed section as Lebanon and Oman. SiBr4 (talk) 21:12, 26 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Accepting the validity of a white, red and black Arab combination but not a white red and green Arab combination is a very judgmental and optional actually. White/Red/Green is a valid Arab choice if you ask me. In case of Algeria, it uses White Red and Green and these are also Arab colours. So we exclude Algeria as well as Oman and Lebanon? Are they lesser Arabs? Even in the case of Morocco which is using two colours, Green and Red, it is still using the Arab colours.... Green is an Arab colour... Tunisia is using Red and White. These are also Arab colours. Red and White is a valid Arab flag combination as well. Let me make my point and then you decide whatever you want. Either we have four Arab colours and any useful combination of the said colours is valid or its not. The only exception is those flags that use a FIFTH unallowed colour, like yellow, gold, light blue etc... These should be excluded simply because they allowed a foreign colour to intrude. But those who stick to a combination of only Arab colours, be it four, three or two are still using Arab colours for their flags... You bring in the subject of the old Iraqi flag. I kept it as it had all four Arab colours there... plus a fifth colour (I assume for the Kurds). But it was still utilizing all four Arab colours just the same, so it was sticking to the all-four-colours-rule. The Arab flags, incidentally have nothing to do with the so-called "Arab Liberation colors" which is just a myth, a decoration. There was no such liberation state nor did it adopt a unified Arab liberation movement and if there was such a movement, just assuming, it didn't have a flag or chosen colours. What is true is the usage of all four as the national Arab colours comes from earlier Arab dynasties and not so-called "Arab liberation". Any choice to exclude any of the Arab colours whatever the pretense is just finding excuses for those country flags on an arbitrary basis. Either all four colours should be used or as I clearly stated, we allow the tricolors including the ones who opt for including green and excluding black as well, making Lebanon Oman and Algeria and to some extent Tunisia and Morocco proper users of Arab flag colours. werldwayd (talk) 21:59, 26 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hello,
There are many sources about these flags (passia.org, A. Znamierowski), feel free to read them: you can then understand that you opinion isn't shared by specialists.
Btw, your explaination above is WP:OR/WP:SYNTH.
--Omar-toons (talk) 01:05, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Pan-Arab colors. 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).

  • 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) 12:45, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:51, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 00:06, 30 June 2019 (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) 23:26, 20 June 2020 (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) 05:01, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Pan-Arab_colors&oldid=1256583954"