Talk:Flag of Saint Pierre and Miquelon/GA1

Passed. —TWOrantula^TM (enter the web) 03:43, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Nominator: Yue (talk · contribs) 06:23, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Reviewer: TrademarkedTWOrantula (talk · contribs) 23:49, 7 June 2026 (UTC)

Well, flags aren't really my strong suit on Wikipedia, but hey... it's good to try something new. (Besides, a backlog drive is going on. I need something to keep me occupied.) —TWOrantula^TM (enter the web) 23:49, 7 June 2026 (UTC)

@Yue: Done. —TWOrantula^TM (enter the web) 17:34, 8 June 2026 (UTC)

@TrademarkedTWOrantula: I made these changes per your review. See also my replies below. Let me know if there's any more changes you'd like to see. Yue🌙 (talk) 01:34, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

Looks like we're done here. This is yours, my friend.

—TWOrantula^TM (enter the web) 03:41, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

More information Rate, Attribute ...

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	The text flowed smoothly, and no typos were spotted.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	The lead section captures the main points of the article. The layout is correct per MOS:LAYOUT. No words from the WTW list have been spotted. Fiction and list incorporation policies do not apply.
2. Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	Although there aren't plenty of references to go around, the article has a reference section, and no bare URLs are present.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	All information is adequately cited from reliable sources, each of which seem to meet editorial standards.
	2c. it contains no original research.	Spotchecking proves that there is no original research.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	Per Earwig, the highest result had a 28.6% similarity, but that is only from a direct quote of the source. Other than that, this is the only source to have similarity score. Well done!
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	The article provides good coverage on the flag's history, design, and usage.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	The article stays focused and does not diverge into other topics.
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	Article is neutral. It keeps a direct, informative tone.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	Article is stable. No edit wars are ongoing.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	All images in the article are freely licensed and are tagged with appropriate copyright statuses.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	Each flag, along with its supporting caption, provides sufficient visual context for the reader.
	7. Overall assessment.	Nice work! This is a great start to gaining proficiency in a new subject.

Beginning comments

Very impressive Earwig results! I've never seen a true 0% run before.
Short article. Shouldn't take too long to review.

Lead

I would prefer a bit more about the summary of the flag's early history.
Done. Yue🌙 (talk)
Also, when was this flag adopted? The infobox says the "1980s", while the category for this article says it was introduced in 1982.
I'm guessing the previous editor(s) got 1982 from CRW Flags, which is a popular flag blog but not a reliable source. No other site online says this and CRW doesn't give a source. The Grand Colombier piece is written by Marc Albert Cormier, a local historian who has uploaded much of the islands' archives to the site, so I reckon if he knew it was 1982 for sure he would have said so in his piece instead of the 1980s. Yue🌙 (talk)

History

Is "Frenchmen" the correct term to use?
Historically yes, as France did not send women overseas at the time, but for the purposes of the prose, not necessary. Yue🌙 (talk)
What are demonstrators?
The source merely says "les manifestants", which can be translated as "demonstrators" or "protesters". I changed the word to "protesters" to make it more obvious that they're protesting against the economic situation. Yue🌙 (talk)
"amid an economic crisis and a tense political climate" - Unless they aren't notable, shouldn't those two events be linked?
Yeah. Yue🌙 (talk)
"coverage in the foreign press" - Foreign press in which country, if known?
France, but I guess that isn't really notable so I removed that. Yue🌙 (talk)

Design and symbolism

"he first reached Saint-Pierre" - All other mentions of Saint Pierre were left unhyphened. Not sure why this is written in this way.
I don't know why it is this way in English, but the common name for the collectivity is Saint Pierre and Miquelon, the common name for the island is Saint Pierre, and the common name for the city is Saint-Pierre with a hyphen. I meant the island so I made the wording more obvious, i.e. "island of Saint Pierre". Yue🌙 (talk)

Status

Nothing of note. Clean section overall.

Use outside of Saint Pierre and Miquelon

I had zero clue this place even had a flag emoji in the first place.

Spotchecking

Since there aren't that many sources, I'll be checking all five sources. Permalink for reference.
#1:
- #1a: Can't seem to find the part mentioning the first flags.
  Source 2 (Aldrich & Connell 1992, now source 1) states that the French king's flag was planted by early settlers, when France had no national flag but royal standards, but the prose can be kept closer to exact wording for verification purposes, hence I removed the sentence. Yue🌙 (talk)
#2: Since I don't have access to the book, I'm AGF.
#3: All good.
#4: All good.
#5: All good.

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.