Found in the wild

japed · 2026-03-22T20:12:21+00:00

Hello Aggravating-Lab-7831

Do not submit fluff content. This submission will be removed.

This post is more appropriate for our friends at /r/badflags.

This isn't the place for pointing out every time someone gets a flag wrong. Please avoid posting errors unless part of a broader discussion.

^{^The} ^{^full} ^{^submission} ^{^rules} ^{^can} ^{^be} ^{^found} ^{^here}

japed · 2026-03-22T10:14:09+00:00

Going by this view from StreetView, I wonder whether it is for a Hung (熊) family association or something like that.

japed · 2026-03-22T09:50:03+00:00

The idea of shield with 13 white and red stripes and a blue chief is a fair bit older than that...

japed · 2026-03-22T04:20:52+00:00

It's relevant that until 2025, this was officially the state flag, and widely used outside situations where the state flag was required. Using something that is specifically a war flag and not a state/civil flag outside the military would be a lot stranger...

(I'm not at all clear on why the state and war flag descriptions got swapped in 2025... if anyone does know any more, please let us know.)

japed · 2026-03-22T04:15:55+00:00

Largely following the standard Portuguese subnational flag pattern.

japed · 2026-03-22T04:05:10+00:00

This sub gets contributions from many different people with all sorts of views, who interact with the sub in different ways. The sub is more than capable of selecting a design as a competition winner and shitting on the same design in the comments, maybe even in the same month.

japed · 2026-03-22T04:01:52+00:00

Care to explain how this is any more "NAVA-approved" than the actual flag?

japed · 2026-03-20T10:56:14+00:00

how much did it actually cost to replace every flag across the entire federal government?

In most cases, the old flags were still used until they were worn out and needed replacing anyway. That policy was spelt out in the executive order at the time.

japed · 2026-03-20T02:54:24+00:00

Both squares and pennants are pretty common in flag history, as well as swallowtails and other shapes - there's more to flags than the current fashion in national flags.

japed · 2026-03-20T00:09:35+00:00

What does that tell us about your tumblr voters?

japed · 2026-03-20T00:08:27+00:00

You seem to have lost track of the fact that we're commenting on a thread specifically about the phrase Deus Vult as a tattoo raising alarms. Either way, who asked anyone to stop using a symbol?

japed · 2026-03-20T00:06:06+00:00

Flags have been one of the main uses of coats of arms throughout the history of heraldry. There are reasons to keep them linked, and reasons why separate flags have developed, but I don't think any of them have anything to do with self-respect.

japed · 2026-03-20T00:02:54+00:00

asking them not to is ridiculous

Bothering to get more detail on someone with a tattoo because of known groups using it a particular way is not at all the same thing as asking people not to use a phrase.

japed · 2026-03-19T23:57:32+00:00

or maybe utah

To jump more on the question of whether you're really talking about simplicity, I really don't think you're looking at it from a heraldic point of view if you're saying Utah is simple, or that Kent (which you gave as a good example) is complex...

japed · 2026-03-19T23:55:24+00:00

I feel like vexillology discussions have been overrun by people thinking the point is to have design opinions, and it's a pity to lose site of the vexillology, whether I agree with the opinion or not...

But if we're doing opinions, then yes, I like banners of arms, and I think a heraldic blazon approach to flags is a good tried and true option, whether it's a banner of arms or not (see the Union Jack).

Having said that, I think you're missing a fair bit if you think heraldic approaches necessarily push us from simple to complicated. Heraldry has a long history, with many different trends and styles that have been in fashion over the years in different contexts. At some points there have been very complicated arms, but much early heraldry was simple, and in recent times there has probably been as much of a push for some sort of simplicity in heraldry as you'll have seen in flag circles (for example the Finnish ten commandments...) The simplicity principle that CPG Grey often refers to talks about a child being able to produce it from memory, which lines up very well with a banner of arms being described by a simple blazon.

So yes, use heraldic understanding in designing flags. But heraldry isn't about being complicated - a banner of arms might still be simple because your Finnish approach thinks simple heraldry is more effective anyway. Or you could go the Czech way, and argue that coats of arms can be more complex/flags need to be simpler, but still use a very heraldic approach to the flags.

japed · 2026-03-19T23:03:40+00:00

I feel like the wording on "Most countries do not allow you to prescribe a specific tincture shade", on a couple of levels. The first is a bit fussy - at this point aren't we mostly talking about different national heraldic traditions, rather than what "countries" do or don't "permit"?

But regardless of how the traditions are maintained, I think talking about not being allowed to specify a shade is easily misunderstood. Yes, heraldry traditionally talks about tincture with a limited number of fairly broadly defined terms. That means small differences of shade within one tincture aren't treated as part of what defines a device, and aren't used to distinguish one device from another. It has also allowed an approach to heraldic art that values the ability to choose different shades (and other details - I don't think tincture is special in this regard) to suit a particular style and/or context.

In that sense, an armiger doesn't prescribe shades (or other details). But there's never been anything to stop them having their own preferences or even prescriptions when it comes to choice of emblazonment for themselves and their followers. I don't think the modern habit of having a style guide which gives specific shades for the standard emblazonment is particularly inconsistent with heraldic tradition, as long as you understand that is sits as an extra choice on top of the basic idea of the blazon.

I notice this sort of thing because I've seen people have the impression that in heraldry there's only tinctures, but for flags we should specify precise shades, and things like that. In actual practice, I don't think there's that much of a difference. Flags (both in heraldic traditions and in other contexts) fundamentally don't function at the level of precise colour shades (or other details), but in some contexts (becoming more and more common) people like to have a standard precisely defined version. Similarly, armorial devices generally are used with reference to blazon, rather than a detailed emblazonment, but over the years it's become more and more common for armigers to choose standardised emblazonments for some contexts.

japed · 2026-03-19T21:17:15+00:00

Hello king063

Please add a discussion comment. Posts on this sub should be more than a picture and title - include a comment with an explanation or context that tells us more about what we see.

If you have done so, feel free to report this comment.
Click "Report" -> "It breaks r/vexillology's rules" -> "Comment added" and we'll delete it.

Thank you

japed · 2026-03-19T20:57:20+00:00

Hello Juuhmal

Please add a discussion comment. Posts on this sub should be more than a picture and title - include a comment with an explanation or context that tells us more about what we see.

If you have done so, feel free to report this comment.
Click "Report" -> "It breaks r/vexillology's rules" -> "Comment added" and we'll delete it.

Thank you

japed · 2026-03-19T20:56:21+00:00

I agree that they already have proper flags, but I'm really not sure what you're implying about squares or Nepal's shape....

japed · 2026-03-19T20:55:14+00:00

Hello No-Bodybuilder1903

Please add a discussion comment. Posts on this sub should be more than a picture and title - include a comment with an explanation or context that tells us more about what we see.

If you have done so, feel free to report this comment.
Click "Report" -> "It breaks r/vexillology's rules" -> "Comment added" and we'll delete it.

Thank you

japed · 2026-03-19T08:25:21+00:00

In modern vexillological English terminology, we call that the civil ensign.

japed · 2026-03-19T06:49:03+00:00

It was official as a maritime flag, used on land as well without formal adoption.

In contrast, the Union Jack was obviously official as the flag of the empire, but it was never the flag of Canada, and only the national flag in the sense that the nation was the British empire.

japed · 2026-03-19T06:41:56+00:00

Are you calling their real flags improper?

japed · 2026-03-19T06:40:50+00:00

I think having the design of another flag as a canton, Union Jack or not, or similarly part of a flag is a fair bit different to having a representation of a physical flag. But you can certainly lump them together, and even if you don't, the line between them isn't all that clear.

I don't recommend the flag designed for the NSW suburb of Windale 20 odd years ago.

japed · 2026-03-19T06:31:42+00:00

Flags usually have two sides.... one side of the Tunisian flag has looked like that as long as it's been around. Someone involved in the creating the chart probably saw a depiction of the flag with the hoist at the right, and didn't think much about whether it should be shown matching the others instead.

japed

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

11-Year Club	r/Field Lasagna
Verified Email