Jump to content

Talk:Saint Piran's Flag

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

Untitled

[edit]

looks quite nice this page now doesn't it! Well done to whoevers put the references and pics up here! 86.136.230.235

The earliest written evidence of this flag was recorded by Davies Gilbert in his 1838 work: 'The Parochial History of Cornwall', Vol III, p. 332.

There are claims that the design dates from prior to c1188 when the flag was used in the Crusades [1] and was seen in 1415 at the Battle of Agincourt [2].

This makes no sense whatsoever. Also neither of the linked referrences carry any further information to support this claim. This highly speculative, unproven, and should be removed.

I removed the quote There are claims that the design dates from prior to c1188 when the flag was used in the Crusades [1] and was seen in 1415 at the Battle of Agincourt [2].'' as there is no proof of this, except for an unsubstantiated referrence to it haveing beeen "In the Encylopedia Brittanica". There is no justification for this remaining, the way it is phrased is highly POV, and the referrences linked to provide NO supportive information whatsoever.

Why has it been reposted? Serpren 05:53, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yet again, this speculative and unsupported, even unsupported in the links, nonsense about St Piran's flag being seen at the crusades, has been reposted. Why? 08:36, 28 December 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Serpren (talk Serpren (talk) 12:47, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I've removed it yet again! Unless someone can come up with EVIDENCE that the Encylopedia Brittanica EVER stated that the Cornish flag was seen at Agincourt etc, I will continue to remove it.Serpren (talk) 12:47, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

'the banner of cornwall' appears im bold here, I'm not sure if I did this accidently when editing or if it was like this already? Dunno if it matters to much. (WM) 131.111.8.97

I've unbolded it now. Maybe someone did it because it contains sort-of the title of the article? Not usual to bold that outside the first sentence though. Skittle 20:57, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

the phrase 'The flags are the exact reverse of each other. But that black cross was not the flag of the Duchy of Brittany.' is a bit confusing? infact I dont have a clue what it means! i presume editing has cut out something, whats the black cross refered to here, the ensign i presume? 131.111.8.104

Animation

[edit]

Why do we have a little animated St Piran's flag here? What does it add? Skittle 19:06, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

>>I added the animated flag, I thought it would add a little something to the article. If you want it removed then that is fine by me. Ben 21:10, 3 August 2006 UTC

If it's alright with people here (I'll wait until tomorrow), I'll remove the animation. It isn't a bad animation, it just feels to me that it distracts the reader's eyes from the article without adding information. Skittle 22:03, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

national

[edit]

Rather POV, the lead-in descibes the flag as a national flag and then later on the text says that it is no longer considered to be a nationalist emblem and flying it does not necessarily mean support for nationalist cause. I have, therefore, removed the reference to 'national'. Conrwall is a nation in the opinion of Celtic nationalists, it does not have that status in UK law.GordyB17:30, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Prior to 1955 when it was deannexed from England Wales had no status with the United Kingdom, with the term England before being taken in law to refer to Wales also - does that mean that the Welsh nation did not exist before that point? I think not!Mammal4 17:36, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Prior to 1955, there was no point referring to the Dragon flag as a national flag because it had no such status. The union jack is a national flag because the UK is a sovereign independent country, the flags of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are arguably so since the UK government defines those territories as countries.
Celtic nationalists might see the flag as a national flag but that their point of view, it has no basis in objective fact. I am reverting. If you want to discuss how nationalists see the flag that is fine but you cannot say that a flag is a national flag when it has no such status and such a claim is controversial to say the least.GordyB 22:18, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

National flags are not State flags - There are no recognised "National" flags in the UK just the Union Jack and various Royal Standards (St Georges Cross, St Andrews Cross etc abolished as state flags by the Acts of Union etc) - By the way I am not a certified nut job Nationalist - Keep the tone a little calmer and try not to wind up the users who have worked hard to get these articles up to scratch. Statements like "I am reverting" without attempt to compromise suggest either greater knowledge or arrogance Reedgunner 13:10, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The tone is quite calm, if you read what I said I did suggest a compromise. I would remind you that there is no article ownership in Wikipedia.
I also said that the flags of England, Scotland etc are arguably national flags, you seem to have missed one key word.GordyB 14:32, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Gordy - Didn't suggest that you were not calm - just keep it calm thats all - I have had experience to these debates before and it ends up with one of the extremist wikinutters (from either side) throwing verbal abuse around. As you quite rightly say there are now article owners on wikipedia - I was suggesting that when making edits you try and breed some kind of consensus - Which looking at you debate on Cornwall talk page is where you are headed. I also would like to add it seems you place a high value on "Englishness" nothing wrong with that of course, but I personally place value in my Britishness, Europeaness and Cornishness, both I think are points of view that may cloud opinions. Anyway - Please don't roam the Cornwall wiki project articles deleting any reference to the Cornish as "National" minority as you seem to be threatening, I agree lets find a middle ground and I for one have no intention of making alterations to England Articles to reflect my opinion that England is a former State now part of the UK or anything else because I can't be bothered. Reedgunner 15:10, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

England is a former state and part of the UK, I don't have a problem with that. IMO it is a nation but I don't get all upset because somebody might disagree with that. I don't go around deleting references to Cornish nationalism but a lot of the Cornish articles could do with a NPOV make-over if not by me then by somebody. Cornish nationalism exists but some articles would lead you to believe that this was the dominant political movement in Cornwall.GordyB 15:41, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed!! - Please view my post on the Cornwall Talk page - Cornish devolution is a big issue in Cornwall but the predominant polictical support is not for Mebyon Kernow (a few councillors ONE OF THEM ME!!!), The cornish Nationalist party or the Cornish Stannary Parliament - you are quite right the articles do need a POV make over and for the those who are about to get upset about my post the facts are the facts until you change them - I suggest people vote for change instead of presenting them as truths. Anyway maybe we could talk about a serious POV review soon - I am ignoring wikipedia for a few days because I am fed up some of the hijacking of Cornwall articles by a few bearded men in Camborne (no offense intended) Reedgunner 15:55, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Unregistered aol user & Consensus

[edit]

There is a revert spat going with this article by an unregistered aol user whos IP always starts with 172. I have changed the wording on 2 occasions back to reflect a position that all can agree on but he or she seems fixed on winding up people to reflect his or her POV. If you are said user have the strength to register - join the debate - and become part of the wikipedia community..... Abusive comments about edits such as "nonsense" does not help build consensus and may lead some to believe that you are an "internet coward"... I however could not possibly comment. I notice that the 172 ips (every time you log on to AOL I believe your IP changes , the first 3 numbers are often 172) have been a little active on all the Cornwall articles lately and this is not an isolated example Reedgunner 16:26, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pretty sure that the St Pirran's flag is not actually the flag of the county of Cornwall anyway - I don't think it has been adopted by the county council in any official sense therefore these edits are actually incorrect. St Pirran's cross is only the flag of Cornwall in the historical sense of the term (i.e as a nation, or a duchy within the Kingdom of England)Mammal4 09:00, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
GOOD POINT!!!! Reedgunner 09:14, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Anonymous editing

[edit]

Please do not attack edits purely because they were made logged in. I would refer you to Wikipedia:Welcome anonymous editing and WP:AGF. If you have a problem with an edit, please specify it, and avoid the ad hominem attacks.217.134.67.191 11:24, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User 217.134.67.191 quotes an essay not wikipedia policy, I cannot assume good faith from an editor who describes my edit as "nonsense". I was trying to build consensus.Reedgunner 18:34, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Ginst.jpg

[edit]

Image:Ginst.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:37, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

The image Image:Cpf.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
  • That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --04:50, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great Britain

[edit]

I have been told to write a note here before editing. So i shall. I believe that the use of the term Great Britain is irrelevant here. The name of the Island is not needed, and the name of a country would be of much more relevance. I plan to change Great Britain to England within the next few minutes. If anyone has a problem with this they should say here. The cows want their milk back (talk) 19:22, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think the wording suggested by Ghmyrtle is a fair compromise. Readers can click on the wikilinks if they don't know where Cornwall is. I'l l add that "in a few minutes" does not allow proper time for debate and emergence of any new consensus. DuncanHill (talk) 19:25, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You could try UK. I have no doubt that you are fully aware that referring to Cornwall as part of England in the context of an article about a specifically Cornish cultural feature is both provocative and unnecessary. Ghmyrtle (talk) 19:27, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well saying UK states it is part of something even less Cornish. Saying UK is no more of a compromise than England, and non British Users may mistake Cornwall for something not part of England without any reference to its being so. The cows want their milk back (talk) 19:34, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
In some cultural senses Cornwall is indeed distinct from England, but it is undeniably part of the island of Great Britain and the UK. Ghmyrtle (talk) 19:39, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well you say It is undeniably part of the UK, but not England. A fact, not opinion; Cornwall is part of England. England is (in my opinion) a better way of describing the location of Cornwall. On the Cornwall article it says Cornwall is a county in England. Alternatively, it could say Cornwall, England, UK. The name of the island it is located on is irrelevant information, which can easily be found out by 'zooming out' (looking at more general articles e.g. England, UK). You would not say Cairo is on the continent of Africa, so why should the landmass be mentioned here? The cows want their milk back (talk) 19:59, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It should say England there yes. This idea we should try and ignore the fact Cornwall is part of England in order to appease Cornish nationalists is silly. BritishWatcher (talk) 15:14, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

this has changed since 2014. A Guy into Books (talk) 20:19, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dispute over the phrase 'formerly' a/the standard of Cornwall

[edit]

I made the #2 changes below which DuncanHill reverted back to #1. The reason he gave was a "combination of synthesis and uncited assertion".

1. "The fact that Gilbert identifies it as being 'formerly' a Standard of Cornwall implies that it was used before 1838."

2. "The fact that Gilbert identifies it as being 'formerly' the Standard of Cornwall implies that it was used before 1838, but not at the time of writing."

First, the reference clearly states the standard of Cornwall and not a standard of Cornwall.

Second, 'Formerly' is defined as in the OED as: adverb in the past (http://www.askoxford.com:80/concise_oed/formerly?view=uk). Hence if it is permissible to infer that it was used before 1838 it is also permissible to infer that it was not in use at the time of writing (i.e. in 1838), otherwise both need removing.

Further, if permissible to say "The earliest written evidence of this flag was recorded by Davies Gilbert" without a citation it is also permissible to say "The earliest reference in a book of flags is in William Crampton's 1990 work" without a citation; it any case it would be practically impossible to prove such a claim, all that can be said is that the "earliest know work..." I don't agree with that (talk) 21:30, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Clues to its origin & French Family Arms

[edit]

These sections are speculative, provided little or no references and constitute original research/synthesis They should be removed. I don't agree with that (talk) 21:52, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That section was added in 2006 by User:Talskiddy, who is still around. It would be polite to raise it with them before deleting it - but, if it is indeed OR, I agree it should be deleted. Ghmyrtle (talk) 22:02, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The info is not my research. More on the Breton connection can be found on this webpage; http://www.crwflags.com/fotw/flags/gb-corn.html

According to Divi Kervella (Emblemes et symboles des Bretons et des Celtes [ker], (headword 'Drapeau', p.41-42, col. ill. p. 38), the flag with the white cross on black field is shown and described as 'the banner of St. Pyran', in Cornish 'Baner Sen Pyran'. A few details can be added to what Jos Poels says in the reference page: Pyran was a bishop-abbot of Irish origin, who came to Cornwall in the Vth century, where he is said to have died aged 206 because of alcohol abuse (sic). The author further highlights the possible link between the Cornish flag and its exact reverse, the former Breton national flag (black cross on a white field). Cornwall was among the Celtic nations the closest to Brittany in several aspects. Another coincidence can be found in the arms of the Saint-Peran family in Brittany, which show a white cross pattee on a black field. Ivan Sache, 3 March 2001 Talskiddy (talk) 21:18, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Whether we need to list all the French Family Arms is questionable, but Blason de la famille de Saint-Pezran is worthy of mention and a good find. Incidentally, I found this reference to the French family arms [1] that dates back to 1668, 150 years before Davies Gilbert, although the blazon is sable à la Croix patée d argent. I don't agree with that (talk) 23:25, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I may remove the other French arms, but I still can't understand why there are no references to the Pirans flag/arms in Cornwall before 1838. Even Gilbert described it as formerly the banner of St Perran and the Standard of Cornwall, but nowhere else mentions it. Talskiddy (talk) 18:46, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
A presentation was given at the ICV 19 in York about the Cornish flag. Davies-Gilbert relied for a large part on the historical works of Mrs Hals and Tokin but neither of them mentioned the flag in their works. A number of theories were given (which I think most are lighted in the article). Nobody knows where DG got his information. I'll keep looking. I don't agree with that (talk) 21:58, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Misleading census map

[edit]

The "The percentage of respondents who gave "Cornish"" map is quite misleading - can anybody change the colour scheme to better reflect the actual data?Oxr033 (talk) 01:55, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Saint Piran's Flag. 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 11:39, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Saint Piran's Flag. 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) 00:36, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Saint Piran's Flag. 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) 11:39, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 19 February 2024

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (non-admin closure) Killarnee (talk) 04:48, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Saint Piran's Flag → Flag of Cornwall – More hits on Google with "Flag of Cornwall", and why complicate it? After all, it is the flag of Cornwall, isn't it? It seems like a case of WP:COMMONNAME Youprayteas (t • c) 19:17, 19 February 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 16:42, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

its the st pirans flag 2A0C:4F41:4411:9300:5E45:59FC:7302:FC0F (talk) 04:45, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ye but Flag of Cornwall is better Youprayteas (t • c) 12:45, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
if you move it then your removing its real name its the st pirans flag 185.254.150.82 (talk) 14:27, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, the description still says St. Piran’s flag. Youprayteas (t • c) 16:21, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
doesnt matter it should stay how it is now 2A0C:4F41:4411:9300:E14B:E9E8:FA6A:9EC3 (talk) 23:58, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: WikiProject Cornwall has been notified of this discussion. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 16:42, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: WikiProject Heraldry and vexillology has been notified of this discussion. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 16:42, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Saint_Piran%27s_Flag&oldid=1213794813"