File talk:Flag of Saudi Arabia.svg

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

Text[edit]

Could anybody translate that text into English?--Sanandros 22:44, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See en:Flag of Saudi Arabia. --Pmsyyz 01:13, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Green[edit]

I don't think the green is this dark. I actually saw a Saudi flag outside a mall yesterday, and it looked much more like the 11 March 2010 version. Are you sure the FOTW flag is accurate? --Mikrobølgeovn (talk) 09:06, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

According to SASO 402/2009, the standard on the fabric for the national flag, the colors are in CIE1931 (head desk) as follows: x (0.2508) y (0.4313) and Y (12.76). If I ran it through http://www.easyrgb.com/index.php?X=CALC#Result it got me 00734F as the hexadecimal colors. This is honestly not too far off from what we have right now. However, I am still trying to confirm the size of the Sahadha and the sword. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 07:26, 13 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Correct" Version of the Flag[edit]

Comparison between the Saudi flags on FOTW and VM

@Alhadramy Alkendy, Aziz bader, and SeifED23: Hello. I've noticed you all engaging in a series of edits and reverts to the Saudi Arabian flag. I just wanted to point out that the flag uploaded by Alhadramy Alkendy, the Vexilla Mundi (VM) flag, appears to be the official version currently in use by the Saudi Arabian government. In case the difference isn't clear, I made a rough comparison highlighting the main differences between the VM flag and current flag on Commons, which appears to be based on Flags of the World (FOTW). The most obvious things to spot are the differences in styling the لا in إلا and the و in رسول.

I've tried to gather examples of the flag in official use: Example 1, Example 2, Example 3, Example 4, Example 5, Example 6, Example 7, Example 8, Example 9, Example 10. As you can see, the VM version appears inside the royal court, when receiving dignitaries, and on flagpoles in the country. In addition, here, you can see a video shot inside the Saudi Arabian Standards Organization (SASO), the body responsible for maintaining the flag specifications, with the VM version flag in the office. On the other hand, there are, at least, some examples of the FOTW version being used in an official capacity, but they are fewer in comparison: Example A, Example B. In both instances I could find, the flags have been hoisted on the wrong side, indicating they've been set up by the non-Saudi counterpart.

Given all this evidence, I am led to believe that the VM version is at least an official, if not the official, current version of the flag. The FOTW version does have an official origin though: It appears to be based on one of several diagrams in the appendix of the 1973 decree (Page 10, Page 11, Page 12) which established the basis of the current flag law. I've been looking through documents all day trying to find a definitive answer on where the VM version came from. It is my understanding that an official flag construction sheet was created in 1984 and attached to a SASO document numbered م ق س 403-1984. I'm still trying to hunt down this document.

I am curious to know everyone's thoughts and how we can proceed with this information, and what the relevant Commons/Wikipedia rules are. My proposal is for both flags to appear on the Wikipedia page as alternatives/variants in some way once we decide which one is the "main" one. Thanks. -- Zyido (talk) 09:36, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Alhadramy Alkendy, Zyido, and SeifED23: Hello, with full respect to Alhadramy Alkendy, what he did by uploading the Saudi flag from unofficial website is considered as a violation of rules, this is wikipedia the free encyclopaedia, Where every informations/flags and sources must all be accurate 100%, by the way, This saudi flag version is currently used by the government officials and it’s media, it is also used universally such as football/organizations/media ect..., thanks Aziz bader (talk) 01:35, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]


No, it's not a violation. We upload revisions and improvements of our flag files all the time, from a variety of sources official and otherwise. The revision by Alhadramy Alkendy absolutely appears to be a massive improvement. Add to that the nonsense excuse by SeifED23 that "We don't do that here", when we very clearly do, and the evidence provided by Zyido, I must fully support the revision by Alhadramy Alkendy. Fry1989 eh? 17:51, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t care whether it’s massive improvement or not, can you tell me how many flags in wikipedia has been uploaded from that website ? It’s only saudi arabia, this version has been in wikipedia since 2013 and it’s used worldwide. Aziz bader (talk) 03:04, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Flag of Saudi Arabia (type 2).svg[edit]

{{Edit Request}}

The flag should be changed from the current version to the Royal decree 1973 version — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aziz bm (talk • contribs) 19:36, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Aziz bm: Hi, and welcome. Where may we find that version, and why is it better? See also COM:SIGN.   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 20:38, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, the version can be found on [1] on page 10, Wikimedia has also that version. File:Flag of Saudi Arabia (type 2).svg Aziz bm (talk) 22:43, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Aziz bm: Please use internal links like File:Flag of Saudi Arabia (type 2).svg.   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 23:54, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Did it Aziz bm (talk) 01:01, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Any Updates ? Aziz bm (talk) 16:25, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Due to upload warring between Aziz bm (talk · contribs) and Xpërt3 (talk · contribs), and because Aziz bm's version is identical to another file on Commons, I am requesting that the version by Xpërt3 (which is also the status quo version) be split off as their own file. See also Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/User_problems#Upload_war_over_the_flag_of_Saudi_Arabia. I will likely be starting an RfC once this is done. –LaundryPizza03 (d) 08:57, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Aziz bm: You are correct. Please correct the calligraphy on the construction sheet; some other variants and derivative works of the Saudi flag may need correcting as well. –LaundryPizza03 (d) 13:58, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That's why I notifed COM:Help desk. Any incorrect flags can be taken to COM:GL. –LaundryPizza03 (d) 14:49, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi :@LaundryPizza03: , I’m not very experienced on designing so someone should do these instead. Aziz bm (talk) 14:40, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

RfC: Version of Saudi flag to use[edit]

In the past few weeks, there has been a heated edit war between Aziz bm, Xpërt3, and possibly others on which version of the flag to use:

I am opening this RfC to allow discussion on which version of the flag should be used by default at File:Flag of Saudi Arabia.svg. Please be civil and do not revert or upload new versions of File:Flag of Saudi Arabia.svg while the discussion is in progress. Note that Type 1 was in place before the edit war and Type 2 is currently in place, but this should not be regarded as an endorsement of either version. The version with the most support will be enacted at File:Flag of Saudi Arabia.svg at the end. (But note that File:Flag of Saudi Arabia (type 1).svg and File:Flag of Saudi Arabia (type 2).svg should never be changed to the other version, even after the conclusion of this RfC, in order to maintain consistency of references to "Type 1" and "Type 2" in the course of this discussion.) King of ♥ 03:09, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, waiting for the discussion Aziz bm (talk) 10:43, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
hello everyone, i'm here to clarify everything regarding this issue from A to Z, the issue is not about whether the flag is supported by the majority or not., it's about how much the flag is accurate and indicate to it's source "the Royal Decree 1973 page 10" [2] and as it appears, the type 1 calligraphy does not match the official description of File:Flag of Saudi Arabia.svg as type 2 does , the type 2 flag matches royal decree [3] while the type 1 matches Vexilla Mundi [4] so there's a big different between the two websites in terms of credibility. when @Xpert3 started reverting this file, i appealed to the Administration Noticeboard and the admin @LaunderyPizza3 supported my version [5] [6] so my position is very clear and legal, Xpert3 has been engaging on this reverting war for his own speculations without providing any source either from government documents or government website that can prove his arguments, his arguments are all based on specific images from different news outlets and if he thinks that his method can determine the rightful flag then here you go
1- [7]
2- [8]
3- [9]
4- [10]
5- [11]
6- [12]
7-[13]
8- [14]
9- [15]
10- [16]
11- [17]
12- [18]
so everything is clear to you guys, all the flags along with type 2 are indicated or share similar calligraphy to royal decree 1973 page 10 [19], when we look at other flags, it appears that many of them match the official description of their flags and both are from government sources such as File:Flag of Argentina.svg, File:Flag of Qatar.svg, File:Flag of Japan.svg and finally File:Flag of the People's Republic of China.svg. right now File:Flag of Saudi Arabia.svg is on the same situation. we need to understand that this decision is very important because it will decide which flag will be used in the future by Agencies,Government,Sport and Business Websites. I think i did all my best to explain my opinion regarding this issue and i hope you guys don't misunderstand me. Aziz bm (talk) 13:54, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@King of Hearts: , can you please revert the flags back to the previous version before User:Aziz bm started to initiate the edit war? I don't view it as fair that the versions of the flags he reverted are still there. Thanks. Xpërt3 (talk) 16:41, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This information is pulled straight out of a now-deleted post, but here is an overall summary of the issues:
I have pledged from a previous post that I would stop edit warring as it is unconstructive, but I would like to state a few things in summary:
  • File:Flag of Saudi Arabia (type 2).svg is used in governmental settings by the Saudi Arabian Government, as evidenced by pictures of this version of the flag in use in Saudi offices and most meetings out of KSA (eg. [https://image.cnbcfm.com/api/v1/image/106819633-1609918195681-gettyimages-1230433807-AA_05012021_241268.jpeg?v=1619586969], taken in Al-Ula during the Qatar-GCC reconciliation in 2021, [https://idsb.tmgrup.com.tr/ly/uploads/images/2022/07/15/218658.jpg], taken on 7/15/2022, during Joe Biden's visit to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia). Additionally, it has been seen in civilian settings (eg. [https://vid.alarabiya.net/images/2018/09/22/ea9b567b-959c-407f-9368-d555dcd2b581/ea9b567b-959c-407f-9368-d555dcd2b581_16x9_1200x676.jpg?format=jpeg&width=960], taken in Saudi Arabia). You could do a quick Google search and find what I'm saying is true. The problem is that Aziz bm attempted to delete this file from Wikimedia Commons which would've been a disastrous move.
  • File:Flag of Saudi Arabia.svg is used in most civilian settings and therefore is not an illegitimate flag. However this flag is not seen in Saudi government offices, only rarely ever seen in official meetings with other country officials in different countries (eg. [https://www.thenation.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Trump-Saudi-Arabia-MBS-salman-img.jpg], taken in Washington during a meeting).
  • Just to clarify, I believe both flag versions with the different calligraphy's are both legitimate flags that should be put on the Saudi Arabia country page, but that is not what Aziz Bm thinks.
  • Now regarding Royal Standard of Saudi Arabia.svg, which is the King's flag, a quick Google search would reveal that Aziz Bm is lying about how the current state of the file is in use by the Saudi Government (eg. [https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/z2J5ozVJKaNQZqH0dDZUXqyOf30=/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost/public/PGZVSHTBIAI6VBC54NNQENFRGY.jpg] [https://saudigazette.com.sa/uploads/images/2022/05/08/1974453.jpeg], taken in the Royal Court in Riyadh in 2020). The version I was reverting back to is the official version. I cannot believe Aziz Bm has gotten this far in terms of reverting this file to an alternate version not seen before he started the reverting war. He has absolutely ZERO proof of this flag being used, I have done an image search myself and found nothing.
  • The royal decree he is using as "proof" is simply outdated, evidenced by the contents of the file (eg. colors of flag not matching the flags from today, coat of arms design not matching the flags from today, etc.) I would think that another royal decree would have been released at a later date, but that royal decree has not been found yet. Regardless, using a 1973 decree does not state anything about the new flags with different colors and designs being used today, which is why I do not believe it is to-date.
  • I copied and pasted this from Commons:Help desk, as this happens to fit in this context. That is all I have to say, thank you. Xpërt3 (talk) 16:45, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Xpërt3, keep in mind that the flags of Saudi Arabia are different from each place because it’s based on how the calligraphers design, also, keep in mind that brining photos from different news outlets will not determine the legitimate flag as long as your version doesn’t match the description. Also, Keep in mind that government documents cannot be outdated as long as it’s still valid and the current flag is originated from the 1973 royal decree which is still in use, And finally, remember when uploading any flag on Wikimedia it should match it’s description and the current one matches the description which is a government document. I believe that arguments is not your strong point and therefore you need to work hard on improving it.

EDIT : you said that “colors of flag not matching the flags from today”, our discussion is about the calligraphy not colors , the colors is known to be solid green since the first Saudi state, the printing at that time is different from today so the colors seems to be more light green in the document. You still haven’t provided a government document that can match your “Vexilla Mundi” Version and instead you’re arguing by showing Washington Post pictures, this doesn’t make sense at all.

Aziz bm (talk) 17:31, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I just showed a picture of Joe Biden and MBS meeting, and it shows the calligraphic difference that I'm arguing for. Also, since you are reverting constantly, the original version of the File must remain until you are able to sufficiently get votes. So these files should be reverted back to before the edit war. Xpërt3 (talk) 21:23, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Xpërt3, It seems to me that your comprehension is slow and I don't know when you will realize my words, I will repeat it again :

When you upload a flag, you need to add a source in the Description and the flag must match the description, the source must be reliable source or official government document, for example : File:Flag of Argentina.svg, File:Flag of Qatar.svg, File:Flag of Japan.svg and File:Flag of the People's Republic of China.svg are all identical to government documents and all match their descriptions. You didn’t do that, you’re trying to prove your claim from specific pictures and that doesn’t work, and as I said, pictures cannot determine the rightful flag as long as you didn’t showed up an official government document. And again, the flags of Saudi Arabia are different from each place because it’s based on how the calligraphers design, for example : the Saudi flag at the U.N [20] appears to be 100% identical to Type 2. Most of the pictures I uploaded above are also identical or share similarity to Type 2 so you can’t depend on some pictures because there are dozens of flags that also share my version, in this case, the only way to end the dispute is to Accredit on an official governmental document and that’s what I did last month. Aziz bm (talk) 22:01, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Aziz bm: do not revert to personal attacks. This is to be a civil discussion. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 16:12, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Do not lie Aziz Bm. That flag at the UN changed and here is a more recent photo with the calligraphic difference that I'm arguing for [21]. Additionally, here is a picture at UN headquarters, provided by the Saudi Royal Palace on March 27, 2018, showing Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman meeting with the United Nations Secretary-General at the United Nations headquarters in New York [22]. You shouldn't use outdated documents to show that this isn't the main flag that Saudi Arabian officials use. Xpërt3 (talk) 18:21, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]