File talk:Alleged Flag of Lord's Resistance Army.svg

 

 

wrong flag

This is most likely NOT the actual LRA flag. See here: [1],

Recent edits

@Applodion: Are you sure the flag has reliable sources? The Sudan Tribune source links to Wikipedia. Wowzers122 (talk) 20:54, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

@Wowzers122: The Sudan Tribune does not link to Wikipedia for the flag, but for general information. It is also not the only source. For instance, the U.S. Director of National Intelligence also uses the flag. Regardless, the exact origin of the flag remains rather unclear, as next to no source actually discusses the LRA's use of logos, flags and images. Generally speaking, I would argue that the best option for the infobox would be to use a replication of the logo featured on the cover of Mareike Schomerus' The Lord's Resistance Army: Violence and Peacemaking in Africa, as it was painted by LRA commander Vincent Otti himself. Otti's logo can also be seen on some LRA uniforms of the early 2000s. Conversely, other photos show LRA members with other logos. All the different flags attributed to the group (including, oddly enough, the flag of Luxembourg) could then be included in another section of the article. Applodion (talk) 17:53, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

I think it would make sense to have a section on this topic. Wowzers122 (talk) 22:40, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

@Wowzers122: Done. I have also added a little section with whatever details I could find on the subject. Applodion (talk) 18:02, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

@Applodion: "the exact origin of the flag remains rather unclear" I did a bit of digging, and it's actually a flag of Anyidi faction of the Nil State in 1969: source. Borysk5 (talk) 15:13, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

@Borysk5: Thank you very much! Sadly, I don't think that we can add your research to the article to clarify this flag's origin. Applodion (talk) 18:15, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

I understand the concern about original research, but I believe that if a reliable, verifiable source is cited for the flag's origin—such as a publication identifying it as belonging to the Anyidi faction of the Nil State in 1969—then it does not constitute original research under Wikipedia's guidelines. WP:OR prohibits editors from drawing their own conclusions or interpretations, but merely reporting what a reliable source states is fully within policy.

If the source Borysk5 mentioned meets WP:RS standards (e.g., a scholarly book, journal, or credible news outlet), I suggest we include that clarification in the flag section, even if it complicates or challenges the attribution to the LRA. This would improve accuracy and help readers understand the issue of misattributed symbols. Thingsomyipisntvisable2 (talk) 22:11, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

i correctly cited this in my edit (feel free to make adjustments but reverting is just extra work Thingsomyipisntvisable2 (talk) 22:11, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

Please note that per Wikipedia:Identifying and using self-published works, Substack cannot be cited for the potential misattribution of the LRA flag. Similarily, crwflags.com is also not a reliable source. Furthermore, if you want to dispute the Luxembourg flag, you would have to provide a source disputing the Luxembourg claim (also, the flag on the uniform could easily be a Luxembourg flag, as the photo's lighting is not ideal). The file LRA map.jpg is also a copyvio of this map. Applodion (talk) 11:26, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

Hi - please don't blank revert made a bunch of minor edits Thingsomyipisntvisable2 (talk) 22:50, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

let me know on talk page if you want me to change anything dont want to edit war lol Thingsomyipisntvisable2 (talk) 22:51, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

I'm about 90% sure that the bicolour flag is purely speculative, based on the ribbon colors seen on uniforms. There's no solid citation or credible historical source confirming its use. The design appears to originate from Jaume Ollé, who mentioned it on CRW Flags—a site that isn't fully reliable and often hosts user-contributed concepts. It should probably be labeled as a speculative reconstruction rather than an authenticated historical flag. Thingsomyipisntvisable2 (talk) 22:56, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

Again: You cannot cite self-published sources or do your own research by using photos/videos of LRA fighters as evidence (see Wikipedia:No original research). Your upload of the vectorised version of Otti's logo has also been flagged as copyright violation. As for the bicolor, I also removed it, as the sourcing is indeed unclear. Applodion (talk) 17:15, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

Can you please just read the sources listed on the LRA page edit instead of just reverting the guy that found the red black blue confirmed it was misatributed. 194.80.233.52 (talk) 10:37, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

Happy to not include the Red yellow flag but it should at-least be mentioned (flag report 64) including images of all these flags misrepresents the LRA. As for vectorised image am happy to not include 194.80.233.52 (talk) 10:39, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

Again: Please provide a reliable, secondary source for these claims. Then we can adjust the article. Substack and personal research are not deemed reliable. Applodion (talk) 16:55, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

@Thingsomyipisntvisable2: Please self-revert. I already explained that you cannot use original research to push your arguments (also, you cannot cite Wikimedia files as references), and you were even warned by another user. Otherwise, I will request an intervention by other editors. Applodion (talk) 20:16, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

Wowzers122, as you have also been previously involved, what do you think we should do if Thingsomyipisntvisable2 doesn't react? Should we raise the issue on Wikipedia:No original research/Noticeboard? Or request page protection? Applodion (talk) 16:30, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

The user's behavior should definitely be reported atp. Wowzers122 (talk) 14:09, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

This is not original research! this is all correctly cited, reverted wikimedia citation. Thingsomyipisntvisable2 (talk) 16:24, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

The citation for the flag (Sudan tribute) links back to this page, and provides no information about the LRA flag itself.

The flag section should be brought back, but the tricolor flag requires a better source for it to be included there. X-Wu-Z (talk) 16:48, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

Agree the flag section can be restored, but only with reliable sourcing (not included in the article before) so restoration or reversion is counterintuitive.

The current citation (Sudan Tribune) just links back to Wikipedia, so it's circular. As for the red-black-blue tricolor, it was misattributed—confirmed by the same person who first uploaded it, as explained here. That article can't be cited per WP:RS, but it shows the flag isn’t verifiable.

Until there’s a better source, including the tricolor (or any images) would be misleading. That said, not mentioning any flags at all could also be misleading. my proposal: Keep the section with a summary of claims, but flag it for better sourcing where necessary. Thingsomyipisntvisable2 (talk) 16:56, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

File:Missatributed LRA flag.png

Thingsomyipisntvisable2 (talk) 17:00, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

@Thingsomyipisntvisable2: Again, please self-revert. Your changes are still original research. As for the tricolor, we could easily add the U.S. Director of National Intelligence article on the LRA, which also uses the flag. Furthermore, please stop uploading copyrighted photos to Wikimedia. Applodion (talk) 17:53, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

I appreciate your concerns, but I don’t believe a self-revert is necessary here, and I’d like to clarify a few things:

Original Research:

The edits aren’t original research — they’re based on existing discussions about sourcing reliability. The tricolor flag (red-black-blue) has long been disputed, and even the individual who introduced it publicly confirmed it was misattributed. That clarification is outlined here, though I acknowledge Substack doesn’t meet WP:RS standards for citation.

DNI Article Use:

If you're referring to the U.S. DNI report that includes the flag, we need to examine whether that flag image was verified as originating from the LRA or simply used illustratively without attribution (as it was). Many government or media sources unintentionally repeat inaccuracies — and if the image originated from Wikipedia itself (as has happened before), then it's circular and still not valid.

Copyrighted Images:

I haven’t uploaded any copyrighted images. If there's a specific file in question, feel free to point it out — but please don't make general accusations without evidence.

To summarize: including an unsourced or debunked flag does more harm than good, and restoring the section without proper attribution contradicts WP:V and WP:RS. Let’s aim for accuracy over assumptions. Thingsomyipisntvisable2 (talk) 18:21, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

To enhance clarity for readers and uphold editorial standards, I suggest the following refinements:

Clearly state that the red-black-blue and red-yellow flags remain unverified by independent, reliable secondary sources and should be regarded as speculative or historically disputed until stronger evidence is available. This will prevent implying that these flags are definitively official or widely accepted.

Add

References for this description (or part of this) or for the depiction in the file are not provided. Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page.

or

It is disputed whether the copyright tag on this file is correct. In some cases this may be because the stated source or other information is not sufficient to prove the selected tag is correct. Please see the file's talk page or the edit summary of the edit which added this tag for further information. With the tool CheckUsage you can check the usage of this file in other Wikimedia projects Do not use this tag for files sourced to third-parties with no evidence of permission to license it under a compatible license, use {{subst:Npd}} for these situations.

templates next to the descriptions of these flags to transparently highlight the ongoing sourcing issues.

Focus the section primarily on well-documented information, such as the Otti coat of arms and the documented practice of LRA members wearing enemy flags on their uniforms, which are less contentious and better sourced.

Refrain from including or retaining images of these disputed flags unless reliable secondary sources explicitly confirm their official use by the LRA. Thingsomyipisntvisable2 (talk) 18:42, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

The flag commonly associated with the LRA is actually not their flag, but likely that of another guerrilla group. Their real flag is a red over yellow (or yellow over red) bicolor. Unfortunately I don't have a source for this at this time, but it's been pointed out in multiple places. Can anyone find a reliable source? 130.64.31.232 (talk) 20:46, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

I agree. [2], [3] 71.184.147.211 (talk) 00:48, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

This still needs to be addressed. The current flag was nominated for deletion ([4]), and the only defense given was an archived version of the above-linked World Statesmen website. The current site has the red-and-yellow flag. 130.64.98.69 (talk) 21:49, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Have you encountered any symbols of the LRA?--TheFEARgod (Ч) 17:21, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

I haven't. - BanyanTree 22:23, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

See here.--Pharos (talk) 01:03, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

In a catalan magazime will be published in january 2012 the correct flag and the arms. Try in catalan viquipedia about spring 2012.--79.145.172.65 (talk) 12:45, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

The flag that show in the article was based in a photo, but later was know that wasn't the LRA flag.--83.56.236.10 (talk) 18:50, 6 August 2008 (UTC)