Talk:Protocol III

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

International relations: United Nations / Law Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject United Nations. This article is supported by WikiProject International law. Military history This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status: Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion not met Supporting materials: criterion met Additional information: /  No existing task force includes this article in its scope; to propose a new one, please leave a message on the main project talk page. Human rights Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Human rights on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Human rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Human rightsTemplate:WikiProject Human rightsHuman rights articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

The last two links, to National Vanguard and Odinist.com, seem out of place on Wikipedia, due to the neutrality issue.

We probably shouldn't put this on the actual article, but I wanted to share it with you guys: Compare the Red Diamond with the

This article is mostly a duplicate of the Red Crystal Flag article, I say we merge this with the other article.

This article makes almost no sense to me whatsoever. How does this relate to the Red Crystal symbol, and why?

I think the biggest problem is that the first sentence in incomprehible. I tried to fix it until I realized I'm not sure what it is supposed to mean....ike9898 22:33, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

First, the lemma of the article is simply inappropriate because it's ways to short and expressionless. "Protocol III" can mean many things, there are several other international treaties which have a third additional protocol. Second, the article is partly a copy&paste from the article about the

With regards to the naming and existance of this article, we have articles on the first and second protocols to the Geneva Conventions, which are at

Red Crystal flag is, at best, misleadingly named. I think what we have here is a messy collection of articles produced in response to the recognition of the new emblem, and need cleaning up/merging, but not deletion. -- AJR | Talk 23:03, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply

]

I read many years ago (and therefore have no citation) that in Ethiopia the Red Cross has long been the traditional symbol of a brothel, so its use as the rest of Christendom uses it has been a problem. J S Ayer 21:34, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I recall reading of the "Red Lion" with a sword and the sun rising behind it as the symbol for the equivalent in Iran. But this was during the time of Shah Reza P... I wonder what happened to this - was it discarded with the Islamic Revolution? So there already was a third protocol! --69.16.84.5 22:03, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Yes, it was discarded after the Islamic Revolution. But this did not require an international agreement, just a decision on Iran's part to switch to another already-recognized symbol.--Pharos 22:10, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Furthermore, the Red Lion with Sun was not introduced through adoption of an additional protocol. It was included in the Geneva Conventions during their 1929 revision. Check the article about the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement for more information about the history of the symbols. The Red Lion with Sun is still a recognized protection symbol, and when Iran abandoned it in 1980 in favour of the Red Crescent, they explicitly retained the right to re-activate its use when they see the need to do so. --Uwe 22:51, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I recall that two chevrons were once a possibility. Perhaps there could be some mention of it, if anyone has more information. CoolGuy 06:08, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This just in. The

The current picture shows medics with the red cross on their arms. Can we get a picture of someone sporting a red crystal? 87.114.65.3 (talk) 23:25, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]