Talk:Naval flag signalling

Citation style?
Hey, Vinithehat, why did you put all the citations in-line? As the initial (and so far sole) contributor to this article, I used Harvard style, and I claim priority for that style. (See Citing sources: "You should follow the style already established in an article".) You mind if it goes back to the way it was? - J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 20:42, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

I have restored the prior mode of citation. - J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 22:17, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Suggested Merge

 * Do not support merge. Bravo Zulu is very frequently used & warrants it's own separate article.  Thanks! FieldMarine (talk) 13:55, 13 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Do not support merge. Passing down "Bravo Zulu" is a distinct Naval tradition with cultural significance that warrants separate treatment.  Thanks! Kgdobson (talk) 15:53, 14 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Do not support merge. "Bravo Zulu" is used in written and verbal communications with great frequency, if not greater frequency than in realm of signal flags. Thanks! Frebo3 —Preceding undated comment added 14:50, 8 May 2011 (UTC).


 * Ditto. The above comments were specific regarding Bravo Zulu, but I don't see any support for any merging.  I have removed the mergeto tag. - J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 20:36, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

New table
Joe: yes, very nice. But two points. 1) The table (images) really should be smaller (like the original set of images). Perhaps even arranged in the same manner as before? 2) Could we have the ICS row on top?
 * ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 22:58, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

(1) I chose these sizes for the following reasons:


 * I left the size of the NATO images unchanged and considered them my reference for the others.
 * Information that I found on flag sizes and ratios indicated that the numerical pennants are 50% wider than the rectilinear flags that they accompany; I increased the size of the pennants on the ICS row to give them the correct proportion in comparison to the flags in the NATO row.
 * Similarly, the JPEGs on the Russian Navy Code of Signals page suggest that these flags use a 1:1.25 aspect ratio. I displayed them at the same height as the NATO flags, but they are wider for this reason.

The table itself is wider because of the increased padding to the left and right of flag images to give the light gray background more prominence in each cell. This cell design was one of your earliest suggestions in our discussion on the Talk:International_maritime_signal_flags page. You wrote, "Also, the column with the flag images should be a little wider so that the gray at the sides isn't completely squeezed out" (which I numbered as 7).

I don't think this needs to be changed, but it may be a worthwhile project to give the other flag tables on the page a similar style.

(2) I have no objection if you wish to exchange the ICS and NATO rows.

--JoeDeRose (talk) 00:13, 15 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Indeed, I did suggest more margin around the edge of the flags. But this should be considered as relative, such as could also be attained by a smaller image. I also suggested that the existing mode presentation was quite adequate, mainly needing only addition of the Russian flags for comparison. I still think it does not need such an elaborate table as you have done, but if nonetheless: we go with it should not extend past the margin, and generally overwhelm the rest of the text. It appears you did change the NATO flag size (from 40px to 50px, right?), and the rest accordingly. If you retain 40px as the baseline, and adjust the others accordingly, the problem will be largely resolved.
 * I'll consider rearranging the rows my self. But I'm a little concerned I'll break it (yikes!), so need to study it first. ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 21:21, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Signals examples
Following link (this) is a codebook of NATO signals (found it via google). A table with the meaning of a few signals (as in the International Code of Signals article) should be made in the article. I will work on it in the near future. Also, is this page a reliable source? It has examples of the use of the pennants. 69.165.196.103 (talk) 13:51, 24 June 2017 (UTC)


 * I agree that would be a valuable addition. And I encourage you to make such a table. I would also encourage you to get a regular account, as it does make things a little easier.


 * The http://www.loeser.us/flags/ site looks to be well-done, and likely with some regard of sources. But it is entirely derivative (indeed, his ICS graphic looks like the one I uploaded), not authoritative, and in that regard does not qualify as a "reliable source" as used in Wikipedia. (See WP:PS.) More authoritative would be something the like the USN Signalman 3 & 2 training manual. Which might still be available at www.gobalsecurity.org. Or even the code book you found. ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 20:44, 24 June 2017 (UTC)


 * BTW, I renamed the "References" section to "Sources", so the nature of that section would be a little clearer. (I tried to add some formatting, but that didn't work; I don't know why.) Now do me a little favor: don't through in citations ("references") in the manner you are accustomed to, but in the manner of the existing citations. Which is, with the full citation in "Sources", and a short cite your &lt;ref> tag. Your source is a bit tricky (no identified author), but I can fix the short cite for you once you move the full citation. ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 21:39, 25 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Is what I have done good for you? 69.165.196.103 (talk) 21:51, 25 June 2017 (UTC)


 * So good that the wife had better not find out??? :-)


 * I consider the use of "named-refs" to be iil-advised, but not matter: it will suffice till I have time to put in a proper short cite. ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 22:50, 25 June 2017 (UTC)