The following is an archived discussion of a featured article review. Please do not modify it. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page or at Wikipedia talk:Featured article review. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was kept by Nikkimaria via FACBot (talk) 9:39, 5 July 2025 (UTC) [1].

Notified: WikiProject Heraldry and vexillology, WikiProject Hong Kong, WikiProject China, Deryck Chan

I am nominating this featured article for review because there seems to be missing information throughout this article. The "Colour specifications" section says that it is the same colour as China's flag, but then doesn't specify what that is. It also doesn't specify what other colour(s) are used in the flag. The flag has also been used as a symbol in recent events concerning Hong Kong, but this has not been outlined in the article. There are some unreliable and lower-quality sources used as inline citations, which should be replaced by higher-quality sources. Z1720 (talk) 14:00, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Z1720, I added other colors and the protest use of the Black Bauhinia variant. History6042😊 (Contact me) 13:38, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@History6042: There is still a citation needed tag, and missing information about more recent events. Are you interested in addressing these concerns? Z1720 (talk) 16:52, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What more recent events are you referring to. History6042😊 (Contact me) 20:51, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe they are referring to the use of the last colonial flag of Hong Kong, particularly during and after the 2014 protests, as a symbol of Hong Kong independence or autonomy. I moved the details to Flag of Hong Kong (1871–1997) to keep this article concise.

I doubt this is the case, but if they are referring to the current flag of Hong Kong being used alongside the PRC flag by pro-Beijing demonstrators, well, that's not really a recent development (or rather a significant change since its introduction). Yue🌙 02:13, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I didn't see the previous question. Yes, I am referring to the flag's use in post-1997 protests. While it is not a significant change, its continued used by pro-Beijing protesters is worth mentioning and the intended symbolism. Is the flag also used by protesters for other causes? Z1720 (talk) 13:54, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Do sources distinguish that from the general waving of one's flag as a show of patriotism/nationalism? It seems reasonably run-of-the-mill symbolism. CMD (talk) 15:08, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen Chinese-language sources, and can probably find English-language sources, that specifically note the use of the HKSAR flag by counter-protesters during the 2014, 2019, and 2020 anti-government protests. That's just a sentence or two missing at most though. Yue🌙 21:45, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Similar but not exactly what I was talking about: CNN article on the HKSAR flag being targetted by protesters as a symbol of the PRC / HKSAR governments. Yue🌙 21:49, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That report does not suggest there is anything particularly notable about the flag being a symbol of the PRC/HKSAR governments. The symbolism is already explained in the article: Chinese flag red, Chinese flag stars, one country two-systems. Perhaps something could be added about how the flag has not gained acceptance by those who disagree with this political situation, but that pro-government protesters use a government flag is to be expected. Flag defacement/variation might also be worth some words, but it is also not unusual. CMD (talk) 08:07, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks everyone for your research. Considering the above, it looks like the flag's use in protests was not as widespread as I thought, so it seems fine as-is and more information can be added later. I'll take another look at the article when the citation needed tags are addressed. Z1720 (talk) 12:48, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Could we get an update on status here? Nikkimaria (talk) 14:17, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I removed or adjusted material that was unsourced. I don't think the flag's use by pro-government protesters is particularly notable. The article should be okay now, in my opinion. Yue🌙 19:07, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• @Yue: I think all is to add to the lead information about its use, both as a government symbol and in recent events. Are you willing to add that? Z1720 (talk) 00:16, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

   Done. Yue🌙 23:43, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. My concerns have been resolved. Z1720 (talk) 21:17, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• "A discrepancy in this rule was observed during the opening ceremonies of the 2009 East Asian Games. Normally, the organization's flag and the host's flag are raised to equal prominence and the organization's flag cannot be smaller than any other flag.[18] However, when Hong Kong hosted the 2009 East Asian games, three flags (the Hong Kong flag, the Chinese flag, and the East Asian Games Association flag) were raised, with the Hong Kong flag on the left, the EAGA flag the same size on the right, and the Chinese flag larger and higher than both flags in the centre, thus making the EAGA flag smaller than another opening ceremony flag.[19][20]" - this is sourced to an olympic manual, a youtube video of the occurrence, and then a website of unclear reliability - is any of this due weight?
• This article relies heavily on websites that are part of the Flags of the World umbrella, which is not considered to be reliable - see WP:FOTW. crwflags is part of this, as well as the flagspot reference (""Colonial Hong Kong". Flags of the World. 18 August 2007.")
• The RSP entry for The Economist states "Its pseudonymous commentary columns and other opinion pieces should also be handled according to this guideline." "A.T. (4 July 2012). "Free speech in Hong Kong: Show of strength". Analects. Hong Kong. Archived from the original on 23 July 2012. Retrieved 24 July 2012." is a blog post under the Economist blog grouping which is pseudonymous - is this a high-quality RS?

I don't think this article is ready to be kept yet. Hog Farm _Talk 00:20, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Yue and History6042: Could you have a look at these comments? Nikkimaria (talk) 14:57, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Nikkimaria: I can look for replacement sources later this week. A bit busy with other projects and real life commitments, but I can get to it. Yue🌙 17:55, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• I removed the Economist blog as the other source verifies the sentence as well (I added the other source in an earlier edit).
• I am of the opinion that the second and third paragraphs in the Display section should be removed.
  • The second paragraph about the Olympics display is true, but it's technically WP:SYNTHESIS and the importance of the discrepancy was evidently made by the editor(s) themselves, because the Chinese-language article given does not speak about the flags in particular at all.
  • Similarly, the third paragraph is sourced by one article that cites the opinions of random netizens. Not exactly high quality journalism.
• The FOTW issue seems to be limited to just the section about the final colonial flag. I will replace those sources with better ones shortly.

Yue🌙 23:23, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• "It was suggested in a 1911 government meeting that the name of the colony appear on the flag in both Latin and Chinese scripts. However, this was dismissed as it would "look absurd" to both Chinese and Europeans" - is there nothing better to source this to than the minutes of the legislative meeting itself? If not, is this really due detail? There is other content in the history likewise sourced only to meeting minutes, which raises questions of due detail for that material as well. Hog Farm _Talk 04:29, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I see two citations of meeting minutes that verify two abandoned proposals. I am not opposed to their removal. Yue🌙 00:23, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I've removed this content for now. I'm at a close without FARC now. Hog Farm _Talk 00:55, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Is chinese-armorial.com a high-quality RS? Hog Farm _Talk 04:29, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Replaced chinese-armorial. Yue🌙 00:22, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Closing note: This removal candidate has been kept, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please leave the {{featured article review}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Nikkimaria (talk) 19:39, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.