This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spain, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Spain on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SpainWikipedia:WikiProject SpainTemplate:WikiProject SpainSpain articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Morocco, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Morocco on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MoroccoWikipedia:WikiProject MoroccoTemplate:WikiProject MoroccoMorocco articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Former countries, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of defunct states and territories (and their subdivisions). If you would like to participate, please join the project.Former countriesWikipedia:WikiProject Former countriesTemplate:WikiProject Former countriesformer country articles
This comment is not just about this particular page, it's more about basic logic. When we have a page about a certain territorial unit X, be it called Colony, Protectorate, Province, State, Territory, or whatever, what the reader expects is information about X, not about any sovereign state Y which happens to control X at a given moment (and which of course has its own page). This is as valid for the symbols of X, such as its flag, as it is for its population figures, capital city, geographical coordinates, etc. I just can't imagine any reasoning for doing otherwise, except if one is deliberately trying to confuse readers, however at least M.Bitton seems to disagree with this point, and of course I need to know why. Jotamar (talk) 23:43, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm suggesting that in the infobox field for flag in this page, we put the specific flag of Spanish West Africa, if there is one, as for example in Gibraltar, or otherwise we leave the field empty, as in French Guiana. --Jotamar (talk) 00:06, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I know there isn't one, however if it exists somebody will eventually include it in the page, that's how WP works. Have you got any more doubts? --Jotamar (talk) 19:14, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Of course it was used! It was used by the army, which was in practice the main Spanish presence in the area, just as the British army in Gibraltar uses the British flag, not the Gibraltar flag, or as the US army hoists the US flag in any American state, rather than the state flag. I already explained the reason not to include the symbols of Spain in the first message, and for any reason you refuse to acknowledge it. --Jotamar (talk) 20:10, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, you didn't explain it properly nor did you answer the question about Spanish Sahara. All I'm trying to understand is whether you're going to apply the same principle to all the other related articles. M.Bitton (talk) 20:58, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The same principle? To which pages could I apply it, when it has always been applied in most of them? Just look for the page of a present or past British colony where the Union Jack is featured as main symbol, or the same thing for French colonies and the French flag, etc. What I want to do here (and I did, and then you reverted it) is what most similar pages already have. --Jotamar (talk) 20:58, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, it was reverted by an IP editor with a grand total of 5 editions in WP, and that was about 2 months after my original edition. Now can you tell me why this page should follow a different policy for its symbols from the one that is in practice followed in most or all comparable pages? --Jotamar (talk) 21:49, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, so now I see that when you asked about Spanish Sahara you weren't speaking of this page, which refers to Spanish Sahara plus a small additional area, but of a different page, Spanish Sahara. Is that right? --Jotamar (talk) 23:53, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I see no reason to deal with Spanish Sahara differently from Spanish West Africa, but for the moment I'd like to settle things for this page, which is the one I've always spoken about in my messages. Can you answer now my last question, i.e., why should this page follow a different policy for its symbols from the one that is in practice followed in most or all comparable pages? --Jotamar (talk) 00:26, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
First of all, we don't have a policy about the symbols. Second, I don't really mind about whether the flags are kept or removed now that my question about what you're trying to achieve has been answered. M.Bitton (talk) 00:56, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, now I need to know if you would oppose deleting the Spanish symbols from this page again, and, since the question has come up, if you would oppose doing the same in Spanish Sahara. On the other hand, since it's true that there is no explicit policy about the matter, I have another request for you: do you have any idea about which discussion page could be used to propose such a policy? --Jotamar (talk) 22:28, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]