User talk:Fry1989

Archives 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10

Problematic prime-minister's standard

Hi! As far as I know, there is no such Standard of the Prime Minister of Bulgaria. I've never seen such a flag on the facade of the Bulgarian Council of Ministers. Moreover, such a flag can not be found on the website of the Bulgarian government. Would you be able to offer any other relevant source for the existence of this standard of the Bulgarian prime minister? To be precise, the flags on the page flagspot.net can not be found in the official Bulgarian sources. As far as I know in Bulgaria there is no such tradition of specific standards of different state institutions. The national flag is used universally. I understand and appreciate your good will in the creation of Bulgarian symbols, but please note that in certain circumstances the result may be inaccurate and misleading. Best regards, Bulgarian Herald (talk) 18:22, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

That is my only source, however that doesn't mean it should be automatically discounted. There have been examples where that site has been right, even when there is no official record, an example of this would be the former presidential standard of &Austria. While the flag no longer is used, and when it was: only at military occasions, not civil, I had another user saying it was fictitious, when we later found out that it does in fact exist, or atleast did. This may be the same. It's possible the Prime Minister's flag of Bulgaria is only used within the military as a rank flag. We will have to contact the Bulgarian Government to find out. Fry1989 (talk) 18:28, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

I hope you will agree that it is hardly logical to create images of official state symbols based on foreign unofficial sources, analogies and assumptions. Bulgarian Herald (talk) 18:38, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

I don't believe a site's place of origin is a reason to discount anything, and the site does have many contributers from around the world. As I said, the site has proven itself to be true before. Fry1989 (talk) 18:41, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

I will not have anything against this flag, if someone can prove with official source that it actually exists. Bulgarian Herald (talk) 18:50, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

That may be difficult, but I assure you, if there is an official source, I will find it. Fry1989 (talk) 18:52, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

This is an excerpt from the Law for the State Seal and National Flag of the Republic of Bulgaria, published on the site of the Bulgarian Parliament:

Art. 16. (1) The national flag of the Republic of Bulgaria shall be constantly hoisted on:

1. the buildings in which the National Assembly, the Presidency, the ministries and the other state establishments, the regional structures of the ministries and the district administrations, the Constitutional court, the judicial power bodies, the National Bank of Bulgaria, the Bulgarian National TV, the Bulgarian National Radio carry out their basic activities, on the buildings of the municipalities, regions and mayoralties, as well as on the state and municipal schools;

2. the entry and exist border and customs check-points;

3. ports, railway stations and airports;

(2) (Amend., SG 69/99) The national flag of the Republic of Bulgaria shall be temporarily hoisted on the buildings where sessions of the National Assembly or sittings of the municipal councils, international conference or sittings, all-national or international sports and other events of national significance are held throughout their duration.

Art. 17. The national flag of the Republic of Bulgaria shall be placed in the front part to the right of the transport vehicles and on the front mast of the navigation vessels when present there are the president of the Republic, the vice-president, the chairman of the National Assembly or the prime minister.

As far as I know, in Bulgaria there are no separate standards for different central institutions. Bulgarian Herald (talk) 19:07, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. However, as mentioned, it may just be a rank flag in the Bulgarian Military. The again, there is the Presidential Standard of Bulgaria, so that is one example of indeed a separate standard for different institutions. I'm not trying to argue against you that the flag may not exist, but we have to find out, and that will take some time. Contacting both the Bulgarian Government, and the Bulgarian Military, are two ways of doing that. Fry1989 (talk) 19:12, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure that such standard of the Bulgarian President exists. Note that the law prescribes the usage of the national flag also by the Bulgarian Presidential institution. Bulgarian Herald (talk) 19:19, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Well, I will contact the Presidency as well and find out, they have a contact section on the Office's website. Fry1989 (talk) 19:29, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

What the law is getting at where the flag is displayed at the offices of the President; my country has a separate flag for the President but it is not used anywhere except for ceremonial purposes. Some other places like Russia or Belarus do require the presidential flag flown on the building when he is there. Now if you can tell me the Bulgarian word for standard, I can try and see what could be found. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 22:48, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

The word in Bulgarian is "щандарт", but also the word for usual flag "знаме" is possible. You could see some results in Google here, here, here and here. There are no results, connected with the hypothetical existence of the Bulgarian presidential standard. Best regards, Bulgarian Herald (talk) 08:46, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

""I swear I saw a pic long ago of the presidential standard, but I can't find it anymore. I know that doesn't count as a "source", but I'm sure of it. We will have to keep hunting. Fry1989 (talk) 06:56, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Please, don't hunt too long. Bulgarian Herald (talk) 08:46, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Regarding File:Presidential Standard of the Republic of Korea.svg

Hi! Regarding the shades of File:Presidential Standard of the Republic of Korea.svg, I suppose that your "4 sources" refer to those posted on User:Shyoon1's talk page. As you can see from 3 & 4, these two photos of actual flags clearly show the blue of the Presidential Standard to be sky blue, much lighter than the #003478 of the File:Flag of South Korea.svg seen in the same photo. I don't understand why you seem to have a preference for airline markings such as 1 & 2 (curious, these two markings should be from the same airplane shouldn't it?), and earlier ones of Air Koryo which you had used as evidence for the shades of File:Flag of North Korea.svg. These are painted flags, while there are a great deal of photos of actual flags flown in daylight available on the Internet. The official website of the Cheongwadae (see Photo section) for example, has a great deal of photos of the sky blue Presidential Standard indoors, some having the National Flag beside for comparison. Or YouTube, looks almost like the sky blue of the File:Flag of Kazakhstan.svg. --Shibo77 16:15, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

I managed to located the law that established the S. Korean Presidential flag and there is a shade of blue mentioned, but cannot seem to get the text copied from the HWP file. I also have the law of the DPRK flag and there is no specific shades of colors either in that one. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 17:41, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Shibo, I'm not using aircraft makings for my references. Those are plaques of the Presidential flag. And that's not the only source. The Presidential seal of the Republic of Korea contains the two pheonixes and hybiscus flower, and that seal is also very clear, a darker blue is used. Fry1989 ^eh? 19:00, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

The aircraft markings were for his mention on the DPRK flag. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 19:15, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

No, they were for both. He's implying that I take aircraft markings over actual flags, when that's not the case. For the DPRK, I had actual flags as well as Air Koryo markings on my side, and for this, I have actual flags (plaques they may be, but they're not aircraft markings) and the Presidential seal on my side. Fry1989 ^eh? 19:18, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Where is the source for the presidential seal to which you are referring? I hope you don't mean the derivative work here on commons created by User:NikNaks93, (what is the source for this Presidential Seal anyways, I've only seen the Cheongwadae Seal being used). You have only the one plaque from the Presidential airplane. While it is clear from the numerous photos (possibly all photos available on the Internet) of the actual flag, that the shade is quite light, much lighter than that of the national flag. See these photos from the Cheongwadae website, it is obvious that the Presidential Standard has a shade of sky blue very different from that of the National Flag. Compare those photos with your shade of dark blue for both the Presidential Standard and the National Flag. Is it not obvious? --Shibo77 01:49, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Yes I do mean that seal, and if you want a source, here you go! 1, 2, and there's plenty more of them, and they are all the same dark blue. And actually I have two separate plaques of the flag, look at them again, they're different. Fry1989 ^eh? 02:03, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

I have "대통령표장에관한건" from the Korean Government but I need a Korean speaker to look at the law and give us a clue. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 02:38, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

In reply to Zscout370, that law doesn't seem to state the shades of the Presidential Standard. In reply to Fry1989, You should put that source on the file page, it is currently stated to be a derivative work, and the derivative works did not cite those two sources you've given. In any case, those sources are for the Presidential Seal, not the Presidential Standard. As for the plaque being different, I really can't tell. (I see the difference now.) Have you seen the photos I've given in the links above? Is it not obvious that the shade of blue of the Presidential Standard is much lighter than that of the National Flag? Therefore, do you not agree that this shade is incorrect, and that the current shade is much truer to the actual flag? --Shibo77 02:59, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

The seal contains the presidential standard as it's design (blue background, two gold phoenixes and a hibiscus), and whether you can tell the different between the two plaques or not isn't my problem. Of course I don't agree with you, or else this conversation wouldn't even be taking place. Clearly there's two shades used, dark blue, and a lighter one for larger flags. That doesn't make one or the other the absolute rule, as you are trying to push. Because the light blue used on the large flags is unclear, I feel we should go with the set darker blue used by all other Korean flags. 03:05, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Sure it does make one better than the other. As I have said, the blue of the Presidential Standard is not the same as that of the National Flag. You yourself have given source #3 which show this to be true. Also, how is it that "the light blue used on the large flags is unclear"? (Okay, this is ridiculous, it is clear as day, can you not access this photo list?) --Shibo77 03:14, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

I can see the photos perfectly fine! No, that doesn't make one better than the other. Until there is a solid source for what shade that light blue is, going with the shame dark blue as all other Korean flags is not only prudent, it makes sense. You claimed I pick and choose, but that's exactly what you are doing right now, by trying to pretend the sources that disagree with you are somehow wrong. No source, and this is all conjecture. And what is rediculous is that you can't even handle the concept of somebody disagreeing with you on this, even when they have sources that say otherwise. Fry1989 ^eh? 03:20, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Well I understand that you disagree, but as I have explained to you, the shade of #003478 is incorrect. As you can view the SVG sourcecode for both your version of the Presidential Standard and that of the National Flag, and see for yourself. Your source #1 and #2 are photos of the plaque from the Presidential Airplane. While your source #3 and the photos from the Cheongwadae (Residence of the President) that I have posted, clearly show the light blue shade. Furthermore, your source #3 as well as many photos from the Cheongwadae, show both the National flag and the Presidential Standard, and clearly, the shades of blue are not the same. So I say again, the shade of #003478 "darker blue used by all other Korean flags" that you insist upon, is incorrect. Or, of course, that you consider the current shade of blue of the National Flag to be incorrect? In conclusion, do you not agree that the shade of blue of the Presidential Standard is not the same as that of the National Flag, and that the shade of #003478 that you insist upon is incorrect and should be corrected? Oh and also, YouTube videos from the Cheongwadae. --Shibo77 03:37, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

No, I don't agree with you and I will not until there's an official source, so stop trying to convince me. There are images for both, and what you think about which is right or not is irrelevant. As long as there are contradicting images, we can't trust either until we have an official source, which is what Zscout is looking for. And when that source is translated and figured out, I expect you to respect it if it says dark blue, as you would have me respect it if it says light blue. Fry1989 ^eh? 03:42, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

The en:Cheongwadae is very much an official source, and also there might not be a law with the Pantone standards. This isn't about selecting which one is better than the other, because your own sources show both the National Flag and the Presidential Standard. The current light blue shade might need tweaking, but I am only saying that the shade is not the same as that of the National Flag, per your source #3 and the Cheongwadae photos, which are very much official. --Shibo77 03:47, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Why have you removed my reply? --Shibo77 03:51, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Because I told you, there are official pics showing both!!!!! Until Zscout's government document which specifically states what the blue actually is, we can't trust either sources, my dark ones, or your light ones. Pics are pics, but an official document that states what the blue is supposed to be is the source we will follow. Now, leave my page alone, you're not going to convince me with 10 photos or 1000. I want the official source that Zscout is working on. That is what I will respect. I will NEVER agree with you based on pics alone, so STOP trying to convince me! Fry1989 ^eh? 03:54, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Okay, sorry that I cluttered your talk page! Cheers! --Shibo77 03:58, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

http://www.mopas.go.kr/gpms/resource/images/korea/down/k0002.hwp is the Law in question, but need a Korean speaker to actually look at it. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 04:57, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Regarding the color of the Presidential Standard: there is not any specific color code indicated on the announcement. (BTW, the document linked by Zscout370 is a presidential announcement, not a law.) there is just an indication that the background of the flag is

鴉青色/아청색

, which is a shade of blue--literally translated as crow feather blue, and my dictionary says the prussian or navy blue as a proper english translation--and the color for pheonices and hibiscus,

金色/금색

, or gold.

I have to say, as a native Korean speaker and a citizen of South Korea, seeing the standard numerous times in the video footages and/or newspaper pictures, the background color of the presidential standard is not as same shade of dark blue as the background of other governmental standards. It is lighter--but not light as you can say it sky blue--it is rather a little bit greenish blue shade similar to cerulean. --Nudimmud (talk) 13:21, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

COM:AN/U

I've gotten sick of your disruptive editing, so I've proposed you be banned from the community. You may wish to opine at COM:AN/U#User:Fry1989 and disruptive editing. Magog the Ogre (talk) 05:49, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Archives

I see you got your archive started. If you have any questions, you could look at mine -- or ask me -- I'd be delighted to help.

More broadly, if you could just mellow out a bit, I'd be cool -- I was really put off by the four items I cited on AN-UP. I surely know that some of our colleagues can be a real pain, but part of our job -- me as an Admin, you as a very experienced user -- is to put up with the real pains and not get into insulting them.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 23:05, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Rd232 was right about one thing for sure, I have become a bit jaded. I've been here a long time, and I've put alot of myself into Wikipedia and Commons. It's easy to become detached. Fry1989 ^eh? 23:10, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

When I get too passionate about one image, I remind myself that we have 11 million images. My guess is that 1% of those, 100,000 or more, shouldn't be here. So I cool down about the one and move on.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 23:20, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

As for an archive, I just let a bot do it. See the top of my talk page and copy the code. Change the parameters if you want, but that makes it simple and you don't have to remember to do it. As for some of the issues you and I have, lets agree NOT to use photographs as sources for updating of colors from this point forward. If you have any question about images, either copyrights, blazons or just anything else, contact me here at the Commons, use email or even outside pages (like Facebook) is an idea. You and I work in the same area and we both have the same goals, but from what that thread I saw, it is just the way you went about it sometimes is not good. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 00:22, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

I see the code on your page for the bot. But I don't know how to configure it for mine so it will set a bunch of archives. Right now I just have one archive page, but eventually it will be too big and I will need a second, like you have 5. Fry1989 ^eh? 00:28, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Or will it do that automatically by itself? Fry1989 ^eh? 00:29, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Automatic. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 00:32, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

ah :) Fry1989 ^eh? 00:36, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Copied it. Can you check to make sure it's right? Fry1989 ^eh? 00:40, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Wait a week and see if the bot comes on by. Also, contact me on my talk page for the mentoring stuff please. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 00:42, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Norwegian Low Visibility Roundel

Fry can you tell me how you elminated the white lines on Norwegian roundel, when you did your Transparent upload Thanx Jetijones (talk) 18:14, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

It's a little tricky, I only just figured out how to do it myself recently. The white lines you had over the gray roundel to split it up were strokes. So you what have to do is click on each stroke, and then click in the top menu: Path->Stroke to Path. Once all your strokes are transformed to paths, you click on the white line, and the gray roundel together, and then click in the menu again Path->Difference, which will cut out from the gray roundel, what the white line is covering over. Fry1989 ^eh? 19:46, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Why not just use a dashed stroke? --Fred the Oyster (talk) 20:21, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Because the white strokes aren't part of the roundel. Fry1989 ^eh? 20:30, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

No, I meant the grey concentric circles, there's no need to split them at all. Neither is there a need to outline any paths. KISS in all things :) --Fred the Oyster (talk) 21:49, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

IDK how to do that though. Fry1989 ^eh? 21:52, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Right click on the circle path -> fills and strokes -> stroke style, then choose the dash style you want. --Fred the Oyster (talk) 22:05, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Excellent, thanx guys Jetijones (talk) 00:14, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Libya flag DR

I was jogging my memory and seen what countries have discarded a flag, yet went back to it in the future, and the only one I could come up with now is Tuvalu. http://www.paclii.org/tv/legis/num_act/tnfa1997292/ talks about going back to the same flag and on here at the Commons, we have two versions so I think this could be something that could be applied to the Libya situation. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 23:05, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Tuvalu's situation is rather complicated, but I'm not sure how we could translate that to the Libya situation? Fry1989 ^eh? 23:10, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Same flag, but used during two different time periods (same with the Libya flag). User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 06:15, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

And with Libya too, we know the draft constitution has the same specifications as the older flag, but we just do not know yet. Look how long it took us to change the image from the Gaddafi green flag to the NTC flag from the 1950's. Time is something should be our guide for that image. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 02:02, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

That is acceptable to me. However, I'm sure you could understand my aversion to us having 3 of the same thing. Some others did not. Fry1989 ^eh? 02:15, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

We only did Libya (2011) so projects could decide if they want to use the Gaddafi flag or not, plus some users took the CIA image which turned out to be very inaccurate. Once we knew Libya went NTC, changed the Flag of Libya.svg image and deleted the 2011 flag and made it a redirect to the main image. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 02:19, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Yes, but I had to go through a huge fight with alot of people before it was deleted. Too many felt it should stay, without giving any real reasons to keep 3 of the same thing in the same format. Fry1989 ^eh? 02:21, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Mostly due to so many wikis using it, and the uncertainty of it all. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 06:16, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

File:Moj_Predlog.jpg

I just wanted to say that this had never been official design for Serbian passport, it is just a suggestion of one user. And it should not be on Commons...--Милан Јелисавчић (talk) 14:53, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

State Military Crest of Texas

Each time I look at this image, I get the feeling that the crest of the State Military Crest of Texas is not in proper proportion to the torse upon which it sits. I don't know what guidelines or regulations, if any, pertain to the size of the torses for these state military crests, but I get the feeling that if the torse and crest were no wider than each other, it would look to be more proportionally correct as a whole. I'm not going to go and change anything that anyone else has created, especially if I'm the only one who feels that an adjustment might help, but I am curious to know if it's just me, or do you see it as well?--Glasshouse (talk) 15:31, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Feel free to play around with it, but I'm not sure how to correct it myself unless you can show me an image. Fry1989 ^eh? 20:41, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

I assumed that when I made a chage to this file in Wikimedia that it would carry over to the same image that is in Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:State_military_crest_of_Texas.svg, because I assumed that Wikipedia linked to Wikimedia for this image. Am I mistaken? Does the Wikipedia image need to be corrected individually? It looks like it's now scrunched from the top to the bottom. I really have no idea what's going on here.--Glasshouse (talk) 01:28, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

No, the file is hosted completely on Commons. However, some times when they are updated here, it acts funny on other projects where it is being used. Usually it doesn't happen, and when it does, it will work itself out. Another way to fix it, is remove the image from the project where it's being used, save the page, and then put it back in. The "scrunch" will go away. I can do that for you if you like. Fry1989 ^eh? 01:31, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

I have fixed it for you. You can see my edits on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Texas_state_symbols history section, to see how it worked. Fry1989 ^eh? 01:34, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Great! Thank you very much.--Glasshouse (talk) 13:00, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Presidential Flag of Croatia

What is wrong with my file? Just click on any picture (for example: http://www.sabor.hr/lgs.axd?t=16&id=19047) on link provided with my picture (http://www.sabor.hr/Default.aspx?sec=4318), and compare with my picture. Is it so difficult before reverting?--MaGa 06:42, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Government sites' "examples" are rarely accurate. It's not a good example. Fry1989 ^eh? 20:40, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

You call the pictures with 3508×4961 pixels "site examples"? Signed by graphic designer? You are kidding, aren't you?--MaGa 05:30, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

No, not at all. Fry1989 ^eh? 05:31, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

I think you are.--MaGa 14:24, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

No, I'm very serious. Fry1989 ^eh? 21:24, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Well, learn Croatian language, and go to Parliamen website and read the Decision. I can't convince you that the sky is blue.--MaGa 13:25, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Don't use that attitude with me. I'm tired of people thinking that just because I disagree with them on something, it has to be my fault because I'm not a citizen of their country, or I don't speak their language, or other xenophobic BS. Fry1989 ^eh? 21:03, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Three of us knows and see that sky is blue, but you are still the Doubting Thomas. Sorry, I can't help you, think whatever you want. Have a nice blue day!--MaGa 21:47, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

This is the official graphic representation of the Croatian flag as of September 2011, approved by the Office of the President and other factions of the Government. I will have to look at my 2009 book by Zeljko Heimer and see what changes were made, but this change is official. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 05:34, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Zscout, thank you very much. I appreciate it! --MaGa 14:24, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

I uploaded the first version of Presidential flag (my ex-username is Suradnik13) and I know that the new version is better than older. On the website of the Croatian Parliament, on the link proveded above, it's clearly written: "Predsjedništvo Hrvatskoga sabora je u rujnu 2011. godine donijelo odluku da se izrade i objave grafički standardi za grb i zastavu RH te zastavu Predsjednika RH. Takva odluka je donesena radi potrebe da se objavi jedinstveni model za svako od ovih državnih obilježja kako bi se izbjegla dosadašnja situacija da su u javnoj uporabi njihove brojne inačice sačinjene raznim tehnikama." (Presidency of the Croatian Parliament in September 2011. adopted a decision to developed and published graphic standards for coat of arms and flag of the Republic of Croatia and the flag of the President. Such a decision was made due to the need to publish a unique model for each of these state attributes in order to avoid the current situation that the public use of their numerous variations is made ​​with different techniques.)--Ex13 (talk) 10:41, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Come on Fry, this is the sort of behaviour you promised to discontinue at the recent RfC. Surely there must be a point of compromise? Assume good faith and all that. If the official Government website is saying it should be whatever colour then shouldn't good faith be that there's a good chance the Government is right about what colour their own flag is? --Fred the Oyster (talk) 19:00, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Category:Emblem of Israel

Category:Emblem of Israel has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

JuTa 20:17, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Croatia_EU.svg

Dear Fry1989

I have a dilemma. I would like to use your Croatia_EU.svg image for non comercial purposes, but I have found on the net many other photos that are same as yours e.g.

http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-75771088/stock-photo-european-flag-on-mag-of-croatia-isolated-on-white-background.html

http://cutcaster.com/photo/801010046-EU-flag-on-Croatia-map/

http://www.bigstockphoto.com/image-18004763/stock-photo-eu-flag-on-croatia-maphttp://www.bigstockphoto.com/image-18004763/stock-photo-eu-flag-on-croatia-map

How can I be sure that these authors are not going to sue me if I use your photo? In another words is this Croatia_EU your own work and is it protected enough by this CC licence? And how come these other authors are selling it, where you are giving it for a free use?

Thank You

The file File:Croatia EU.svg is freely licensed for all uses. I don't think you will have to worry about the creators of the other images suing you, because the map is made of free information, as it's a simple map of Croatia, and the European Union flag. However, if anybody did poke at you for using it, all you would have to do is direct them to this file, and tell them it's simple common-property information. The others may wish to sell the files they created, but I never hold such restrictions to any of my work :) Fry1989 ^eh? 21:52, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

File:Seal_of_the_Turkish_Navy.svg

File:Seal_of_the_Turkish_Navy.svg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Reality006 (talk) 20:50, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

wrong placement?

Excuse me, I do'nt know English. Why? This flag is more detailed and perfect.--Villeguillo (talk) 10:16, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

The coat of arms isn't centered. Fry1989 ^eh? 21:22, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Oh, and since you're monitoring my talk page

User:Wsiegmund, it's sad that you didn't even give me the opportunity to reply on the AN/U (also notice Takabeg didn't even bother to notify me of it either). However, I will once this black has passed. I won't remove Takabeg's comments again, but I will show why they're disruptive and inaccurate. I will also show plenty of proof of his constant practice of sticking his fingers in his ears, and blaming others for his lack of understanding about copyright. I have never personally attacked him, that is a lie and is easily proven false. Fry1989 ^eh? 23:24, 17 November 2011 (UTC)