File talk:Presidential Flag of the Republic of Croatia.jpg

I'm very sad to see that Suradnik13 uses without permission this flag that is personal work of some author from FOTW. FOTW does not approve use of their material, as for I've heard. -- Rainman 23:48, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

The crescent must be thiner

It must. -- Rainman 23:51, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Red and silver squares

They are mandatory here. The Law states them to be red and silver - not - red and white (silver). -- Rainman 00:47, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

I see that there is a problem for you - this silver question. The Coat of arms of Croatia has two versions - one with silver squares in place of white ones and the ordinary white squares version. Silver version is seldom used but is mandatory on one place - that being the Presidential Flag of the Republic of Croatia. -- Rainman 01:31, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Ask whom ever you want. -- Rainman 01:31, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Silver can be correctly presented as white in heraldry, just as gold can be presented as yellow. Which is used depends on the artist. /Lokal_Profil 22:51, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

I know that, but in this case representation of silver and gold is mandatory. Furthermore the file that Zscout370 has proposed is from FOTW and uses thick new moon (crescent). -- Rainman 23:58, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Tagging

"PD-Ineligible" probably won't work here... AnonMoos

Why? The fact that we can contribute the "orriginal work" to someone is not what should stop us from using that tag. This file has been accepted by the Croatian Parliament and is common "ownership" of the entire Croatian Nation. I don't know weather has the Croatian Parliament arranged some deals with the artist but it would be unfair to say that Croatian Symbols are owned by someone. They are a common ownership of the Croatian culture and heritage which is a part of World heritage - therefore a part of commons. -- Rainman 22:01, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Replying her as well. just because the Croatian Govenrment owns the copyright for the image doesn't necessarily make it Public Domain. Unless there is a specific Croatian law which states that govenmental symbols are PD (or GFDL according to the current tag) the image must be assumed to be protected by copyright. And even if there was such a law and the image is indeed PD then PD-ineligible is not the right PD-tag to use. /Lokal_Profil 22:50, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

In Croatia there are four branches of "government" (quotation marks are used because some of them are not to be translated as government (as English Language clearly uses the term government for the executive branch of "power").

These are:

• Legislative branch or Parliament that is the highest representative of the Nation (in Croatian: Sabor)
• Executive branch or Government that is to enforce the Law and answers to Parliament (in Croatian: Vlada)
• Judiciary - that ensures that all institutions and the Nation upholds the Law (in general authonomous - decision making wise but answers to the Ministry of Justice in some administrative parts and to the State Council of Judiciary body made by Judges and Legal proffesionals that appoint Judges and removes them from office - that Council is elected by the Parliament)
• Constitutional Court - that ensures that all obey the Constitution (completely autonomous, does not answer to anybody).

So it would be prefferably not to state that Croatian Government has anything to do with ownership (or copyright) of Croatian Symbols.

I would need more time to try and find such a law, but if that law does not exist we should delete almost all of the flags, coat-of-arms and other symbols of other nations that have such problems e. g. not having the law.

Suggestions of proper licensing please.

I looked at other files in the Presidential flags, some of them use license tags like PD-self or worse - why this file, why now.

Rainman 00:12, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Coat of arms are defined by their blasoining, i.e. text describing what they look like. Every own interpretation of this text will give rise to a unique image which is copyrightable by the artist. Thats why there are several coats of arms with PD-self tags etc. It's only when a "government symbols ar PD" law exists that one can use the "official" coat of arms. But yes I do admit that there are a lot of errorously tagged flags and CoAs on commons, I simply tag the ones I come across. Anyhow the situation for this image seems to have cleared up so I'll remove the "problem" tag. /Lokal_Profil 11:00, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Blazoning

23^rd Article of the Law on the Coat of Arms, the Flag and the Anthem of the Republic of Croatia and on the Flag and the Sash of the President of the Republic of Croatia - Croatian language only.

The Flag of the President of the Republic of Croatia is a square form hemmed by a thin edge of alternating red and white fields. In the centre of the Flag, on a navy blue background, appears a sign in the form of the historical Croatian Coat of arms, with 25 red and silver fields (squares). The Shield is surrounded (direct translation: venerated - not to be confused with decorated) by a wreath of medallions in which there are portrayed the historical Coats of arms ordered from left to the right side of the Shield one after the other: The oldest Croatian Coat of arms, followed by the Coats of arms of the Republic of Dubrovnik, Dalmatia, Istria and Slavonia. Parallel golden, red and white lines combined in sheaves extend longitudinally from the medallions. Placed above the Shield is a ribbon in the colours of the Flag of the Republic of Croatia (meaning: the National Flag) on which there are in its centre gold letters of Roman capitals, done as embroidery, the letters “RH” which mean: Republic of Croatia (in original: Republika Hrvatska).

Translation done by -- Rainman 00:42, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Fotos

Example by --Suradnik13 20:17, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

It is not in the domain of the President to decide of the Flag of the President. It is up to the Croatian Parliament to instruct the Government of the Republic of Croatia to (by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and European Integrations) communicate to WIPO a different version. Even this flag that you think correct uses silver squares instead of white. Therefore it is strange to see your revertment to the file that we are discussing - that revertment being worse by a number of graphical standards and by the state of legality of the crescent issue and other issues. See an another example of how correct our President can be [1] - maybe better said - his "people" in the Office of the President and the Protocol of the President. -- Rainman 23:11, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

That picture was not taken in Croatia, probably in Germany and thats mistake is not in response of croatian Protocol of the President but german protocol. --Suradnik13 18:38, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

The two protocols have joint responsability. Stop making apologies for some protocols of our country. -- Rainman 20:59, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Nope, you stop talking nonsens. --Suradnik13 11:12, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Whoever will read your sentence about making apologies of Croatian Presidential Protocol would came to the same conclusion. And you know the FOTW and FAME policy about using their flags. I am not going to sink to your level of communication, because you are a person that do not care about the laws of our own country. -- Rainman 22:59, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Nope, you dont know the law. --Suradnik13 09:12, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Who said that I do, you are attacking me where ever you go. These attack continues from our first encounter at hr:Hrvatske županije page or even at hr:Prebivalište and are almost constantly of ad hominem attacks. I said that you do not care. And this is obvious, just wait and see. The time will come when SpeedyGonzales, Donatus, Minestrone and other admins on Croatian Wikipedia should see the lack of knowledge on your part. -- Rainman 21:13, 15 February 2008 (UTC)