Commons:Deletion requests/File:Flag of New Swabia.svg

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

File:Flag_of_New_Swabia.svg

86a Strafgesetzbuch. 84.61.188.59 19:12, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

• Um...speedy keep? Chipmunkdavis (talk) 00:05, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
• What's wrong with it? --NuclearVacuum (talk) 01:41, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

The sourcing is likely dodgy, the flag may be wholly fictional, unless someone somehow found in a dusty German archive somewhere a proposed flag design for a territory on which a claim was never made. Could have happened, but I don't think so. That said, my only worry would be how it's used in articles. I see no need to delete it altogether from commons, given the only woe I see here is that it's most likely a fictional graphic. Someone might find it someday and find it helpful for harmless fiction. Gwen Gale (talk) 02:32, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

1 Gwen Gale, please do not discredit pages by inserting claims of what Germany did or did not do. This isn't the place for it. Night w (talk) 04:41, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

• Speedy keep. He's citing Strafgesetzbuch section 86a, which unfortunately doesn't affect Wikimedia. Night w (talk) 04:51, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

• Comment. The original version (GIF) of this image was created and used for the article on New Swabia in the Russian WP in July 2006 (here's the diff),where it has been part of the article since that time. It was created by User:Maxim Razin who was an active contributor from December 2004, especially to the Russian Wikipedia (here's his edit count), but he has been inactive since December 2007.

Another version (SVG) was then created and uploaded here by NuclearVacuum in July 2010, based on Maxim Razin's earlier GIF version.

Over the past couple of weeks Bluesclues100 has created a number of flag images for regions of Antarctica and surrounding islands, which appear to be mostly fictional - but including this New Swabia flag image.

User 84.61.188.59 has rightly called for these spurious flag images to be deleted. In the case of the New Swabia flag image however, he has nominated it for deletion not on grounds of dubious authenticity, but under 86a Strafgesetzbuch.

From the English WP article: The German Strafgesetzbuch (Criminal Code) in § 86a outlaws "use of symbols of unconstitutional organisations". This concerns Nazi symbolism in particular and is part of the denazification efforts following the fall of the Third Reich.

The law prohibits the distribution or public use of symbols of unconstitutional groups, in particular, flags, insignia, uniforms, slogans and forms of greeting.

Gwen Gale has now questioned the authenticity of this flag image, which is an entirely different matter. As this image has been in the Russian WP New Swabia article since 2006, this does suggest that that it may be authentic - and given the Nazi penchant for symbols, it does seem possible. As NuclearVacuum has some Russian language skills (mine are practically non-existant), I suggest that he check the references (and their reliability) there. Cheers, Bahudhara (talk) 06:51, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

•  Keep No proof the flag doesn't exist, and national bans on former NAZI symbols do not effect Wikipedia. Fry1989 ^eh? 21:52, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

---

Kept. Jcb (talk) 21:28, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

File:Flag of New Swabia.svg

This is an altered version of the flag of the Reichskolonialbund, as described here. I dont know if it needs to be deleted, but i really dont think we should be perpetuating misinformation. this flag is used on multple pages on 2 WP's, inaccurately. I now note the previous deletion discussion. The argument that its being used on a WP article is patently false circular reasoning. can we at least remove incorrect information on this, with some consensus so im not seen as disruptive for doing so myself?Mercurywoodrose (talk) 04:25, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

• Oppose: The file already states it's fictitious and we can't completely control what is put on Wikipedia. From what I'm getting from this is that your issues are towards non-English sites. You should bring up discussions on those particular talk pages to get any real info change. I'm all for updating the file description or changing the file name to reflect it non-authenticity, but I don't necessarily support removing it based on what other users do with it. I agree on allowing a consensus on this issue. --NuclearVacuum (talk) 01:32, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
• Commment the file doesn't state its fictional. it states it is the flag of a disputed territory. Its categorized as fictitious or special, so a cursory reading of the entire file page could easily lead one to believe its not fictitious, but "special", whatever that means. Yes, all i really want is for it to be properly described and categorized so that wikipedias dont use it incorrectly. We cant control what people place in articles, but we can make sure they arent mislead. I dont need it removed.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 02:31, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

The template and category is what I meant by it being marked as fictitious. You are more than welcome to rewrite the description if you want, I would've had nothing against it. --NuclearVacuum (talk) 17:11, 19 March 2014 (UTC)