Talk:Flag of Australia

Title of the flags representation is wrong

its the union flag not the union jack, its only the union jack at sea. Fact check it! 2001:8003:26A8:9900:C449:94B4:9FFB:ECA5 (talk) 08:32, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

Flag Debate in lead

@Willthorpe I think the flag debate needs to be included in the lead. I think it is a notable enough debate with the suitability of the current design a "prominent controvers[y]" of the kind mentioned in MOS:LEAD. The debate is also mentioned in a whole section and part of the history section, so I feel its a significant part of the page and therefore should be in the lead. There are lots of news articles and other material devoted to flag redesigns and the debate, suggesting it is important to the topic.

The mention I had of the flag debate could be too long, but I was erring towards avoiding NPOV. Happy to discuss further. Safes007 (talk) 12:56, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

@Safes007 It contend that is a low-level persistent debate of the kind that may be expected to exist surrounding national symbols. I don't think it is prominent, in a way that the flags of New Caledonia or certain American states have been prominently debated, or say the 1928-94 South African flag; these are more appropriate applications, I think, of that phrase. I actually saw debate over the flag described somewhere on Wikipedia as 'low level' and 'persistent' which I think is fair.

Debate around the flag peaked in the nineties, and has subsided since then. I would argue this has been aided by the adoption of the Indigenous flags alongside it (though, notably, this has recently become a pointed feature in federal politics, reflective of what might be thought of as another example of low-level contention but certainly nothing in itself warranting lede inclusion in that article).

We also have a seperate article to discuss the subject.

I credit your aim to write in NPOV and include both sides of the debate, but I don't think it warrants inclusion in the lede. Will Thorpe (talk) 13:45, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

To put it this way: this article focuses on the flag and its development, with the debate largely outsourced to another article (but also with a subsidiary section featured in this article). Will Thorpe (talk) 13:56, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

The debate may be low level, but it is persistent. Polling has been consistent around 30-40% support for change since the time that the debate was at its peak and discussion emerges quite regularly in the media. Debate around the flag seems to core to me to the 'story' of the flag, especially in contemporary times. To me, the fact that there is a separate article on the flag debate makes the argument that it should be mentioned in the lead stronger, as it indicates the debate is notable, significant and the focus of numerous published sources.

Would something shorter like "Since the 1980s, the suitability of the flag's current design and the inclusion of Union Jack has been subject to debate." work? Safes007 (talk) 02:23, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

I didn't find the length of your original insertion an issue, and were the debate to be included in the lede, I think the way you did it would more or less be the right way to go about it.

I'm not sure it really is a prominent media feature, as someone that reads newspaper articles every day, and sometimes writes them. Looking at the first page of results for 'Australian flag' in the news section on Google search, debate is indeed low-level – though the results are significantly influenced by the result occurrence of Australia Day, and there is a recent ABC News piece interviewing homeowners about why they fly the national flag. There is also a Roy Morgan poll from late last year affirming what you stated.

Changing the settings to exclude results in the lead-up to Australia Day – which are mainly encouragements to fly the flag or stories of a flag being hoisted here or there, or other things besides – media coverage seems muted, with opinion pieces from 2016 or 2014 showing up on the first page (admittedly, I don't know exactly how Google's algorithm for news works, and this is likely to be a flawed way of testing but I still think it's good enough to make a point). I imagine a major motivation for stories about the flag debate would be intrigue, as flags are one of those cultural topics likely to catch a few eyes. Considering the significance of the national flag as the country's pre-eminent national symbol, these results don't to me seem very major by comparison. Will Thorpe (talk) 03:46, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

I personally think there are enough media articles and other material to warrant inclusion in light of significant minority support, but this is a judgement call at the end of the day. Safes007 (talk) 13:38, 1 February 2025 (UTC)