Talk:Emblems of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

What is a Greek Red Cross ?[edit]

The term Greek Red Cross is mentioned 4 times in the article, without an indication of what it is, what it means etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:587:6E00:458C:19D1:F84:EBE0:FE7F (talk) 22:37, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Merger of Red Crystal[edit]

  • If this article is about the official emblems recognised in the Geneva Conventions (i.e. by the high contracting parties) and by the ICRC, the red crystal should be mentioned alongside the red cross, the red crescent and the red lion. The crystal is an official emblem just as the others are. If the article was about all the emblems ever in use by some part of the Movement, we would have to mention the red swastika and others as well. A better title for this article is "Official emblems of the Red Cross Movement".
  • The Red Crystal should be merged with the article on the other emblems. That is where it belongs, now that the Third Protocol has been adopted. This is not about atheism, religion or whether it is new and shiny - just a grouping of information about officially recognised symbols that have the same or similar legal foundation, and are used by the same group of organisations.

A small aside on the "Red Lion and Sun": It is correct that it is not, currently, in use. In fact, it was only ever used in Iran, before the Islamic Revolution. After that, the Iranian authorities changed the emblem used to the Red Crescent, and the National Society followed suit. Just to make the point that at the end of the day, these embems belong to Governments - organisations such as the American Red Cross, the Sudanese Red Crescent and other National Societies are simply licensed (albeit, exclusively within their respective countries) to use them.

--Erkowit 06:01, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • The Red Crystal should not be placed under Red Cross. I, like many other secular people, am not a member of the Red Cross, and never have been. I am an Atheist and a proud member of Red Crystal. Putting this under Red Cross implies something highly inaccurate-- worse than lumping all Christianity and Islam under Judaism. The cross and the moon are not merely variants of Solomon's six-pointed star. The red crystal is not a derivative of the red cross. The appropriate proper course of action is a referencing link from the Red Cross symbol page, but the Red Crystal symbol has its own history and meaning.
  • Leave it alone for a while, its new and shiny. In a few months time, a merge would probably be a good idea, but for now I think we should leave it at its own article space. Saberwyn - 19:35, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • But remove the Red Lion that someone has put alongside the cross, crescent and star. It has been abolished as a symbol and as a concept ages ago, and has nothing to do inside a brand new logo. Maja, Norway.
Technically not, or so I am led to believe. It _is_ unlikely to be used, but it is still valid. Luis Dantas 10:41, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • Abolished. Was the original lion symbol ever in use? If so, it should stay as a possibility. Saberwyn - 11:10, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
It was in use at least from 1929, up until 1980, albeit apparently only in Iran. For references, please see [1], Red Lion and Sun Society, and International Red Cross#Red_Lion_with_Sun:_currently_not_in_use. Luis Dantas 02:52, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Keep the Lion, it's part of history, don't succumb to ignorant PC.[comment: agree, but even if one doesn't, abolishing the "Red Lion and Sun" would require agreement from Iran that they give up a right enshrined in international law (even if that right is not used for the time being), and gathering together 190-odd governments to agree to the proposition at a cost, probably of 2 -3 million USD...doesn't seem worth the bother]


  • If you're going to keep the lion, you also need to add a red Swastika, as it was used by Germany during WW2 /sarcasm. Seriously though Keep - No Merge This is a fairly major development in the history of the Red Cross movement and deserves its own page.pm_shef 06:16, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep the lion, merge red crystal, RENAME article to "Geneva Convention Humanitarian Protection Symbols" or something like that. The article is really just misnamed. It's not "emblems of the red cross". As pointed out below, it's "emblems of humanitarian aid recognized by the geneva convention" or whatever the correct wording actually is. Note: the enclosing within the red crystal should also be added, like it is in this article -Ashi
  • Merging both Red Cross and Red Crystal into a "Geneva Convention (...) Symbol" with separate sections for each (with history and all) and an introductory text would seem OK to me. Both pages seem to concern the same subject. Just my two cent opinion. [user:mandragorae] 30 April 2006
  • Keep for now - since this is a current event, I think we should let this sit for a while before changing stuff around too much. I agree with a previous poster that "Emblems of the Red Cross" is a misnomer, since (unless I'm misunderstanding things) the Red Crescent is an emblem of the Red Crescent, not of the Red Cross..? MMad 19:03, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The emblems[edit]

  • This page displays the emblems recognised in humanitarian law (Geneva convention). The only recognised emblems are the red cross, red cresent, red lion with sun (not in use since 1980) and the (new) red crystal. The Red Star of David (Magen David Adom) is not recognised by the Geneva Convention and should not be listed under the official emblems. Israel is free to use this symbol within its own borders but it has no international status. The descriptions are clear in this matter, but listing the Red Star of David in line with the four official symbols makes it look like it has a official status in international humantarian law. I find this to be confusing on first sight. (The Red Cross - page describes this symbol under the heading "Other symbols used by specific national societies" and not under the heading "Symbols recognized by the Geneva Conventions" which links to this page for details).[User:WoutR] 11 January 2006

abuse?[edit]

Would like to see more in the article about documented abuses of the Red Cross/Crescent/Crystal symbol.

no respect[edit]

  • In modern war, the red cross is just a nice colorful target.

- Sure, but it should be noted that (real) combatants are by international law required to respect the cross. Reported abuse of the Red Cross or intentional targeting of personall with a Red Cross will most likely result in hanging or a severe prison sentance. Just because modern war might be more "unjust" than before, the laws continue to exist.

deception[edit]

  • Israeli's don't trust ambulances with the Red Cross/Crescent because terrorists have been known to use them for transport on occasion.
  • I've also heard some things about Red Cross transport being abused in WWII, but the theories I heard seemed a bit outlandish.

Swastika[edit]

Having read this page it sounds like in theory national organisations should be allowed to use their own symbol if they can develop significant recognition. It would be interesting to see whether India or Sri Lanka (or anyone else) is allowed to use a Red Swastika if they ever try again... Nil Einne 22:16, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually Red Swastika was used also in China (swastika is apparently also the old taoist symbol).

The Red Swastika[edit]

The red swastika which is linked from this page should be listed, as apparently there is nothing that makes it more important than the red lion. According it's article it still has offices in Taiwan and Honkong. 84.167.235.25 17:42, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply] 

-- The red swastika is not a recognised Red Cross/Red Crescent emblem under the Geneva Conventions (or protocol III as is the Red Crystal) wheras the red lion and sun is actually officially recognised which I assume is the only reason why the red lion and sun is mentioned even though it's now out of use Capespartel (talk) 07:30, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Emblem Controversy/J&J lawsuit[edit]

I just added a section on the J&J lawsuit filed in NY district court on 9 Aug. 2007, including links. Should there be a "timely" tag added to this article, now that there's a big lawsuit boiling down over it? Cheers, all! Strike71 08:27, 9 August 2007 (UTC) Whoops. Corrected the date of the filing to 8 Aug., not 9 Aug. My only excuse is it was a late night and the dates were starting to blur together. Strike71 18:31, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I revert the blanking done on the section stating that the US was not conforming to its treaty obligations (surprise surprise, from the people who brought us torture...). The single most important fact is the international treaty establishing protection of Red Cross images. This should not be deleted, (and does trump US law - unless the United States wishes to withdrawal from the Geneva Conventions?). It is OR (for now) for me to say it trumps international law, which is why the article does not say it trumps US law, it just states the facts - that there is a US ratified treaty which prohibits Johnson & Johnson from using the image. 24.7.91.244 06:31, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Links 18 and 19 are stale. 67.183.70.107 (talk) 23:27, 29 March 2009 (UTC) Anon.[reply]

Computer games[edit]

I think I remember hearing a while back that the Red Cross organisation wanted to make it illegal for computer games to use the image of the red cross for health pickups. However I know very little on the subject and how it was settled(though I have noticed that the image isn't used in games anymore), should it be included here? --Cobsterjh (talk) 14:02, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Use in Online Encyclopedias[edit]

I have a question regarding this article as a whole. What makes it acceptable for WIKIPEDIA to use the symbol? I have tried to find anything in the geneva conventions and in the national laws protecting the symbol, but there is nothing about informational material being an exception to the rule that it shall never be used except by the red cross as an organization. Or are the commons images licensed by the red cross? In general, can one make a photo of a red cross worker? Can one make a photo of a person wearing red cross memorabilia like pins? Can one draw a red cross worker? Can one draw a red cross memorabilia mug/pin/medal? Can one make a video of a red cross worker? Can one make a 3D modeled image of a red cross worker? Can one make a 3D model of a redcross medal? And here's the slope: Can one make a photo/video of a hospital with a red cross? (for recording a personal video) Can one use a photo/video of a hospital with a red cross for profit? (in a documentary or news) Can one crop, enhance, or in other ways digitally modify a photo/video of a real building/person with a red cross, and profit off of it? (zooming in on a red cross worker/building in a footage). Can one make a drawing/3D model of a real hospital with a red cross? (for presentation of the hospital, or in news) Can one make a 3D model of a person/object featuring the red cross and use it for recreation/reenactment of actual events? (Like documentaries or news) Can one make a 3D model of a person/object featuring the red cross and use it for recreation/reenactment of actual events with some creative freedom? (like major hollywood blockbusters) Can one make a 3D model of a person/object featuring the red cross and use it for recreation/reenactment of speculated/fictional events? (like the red cross being supposedly misused in wartimes in a historical investigative programme) Can one make a 3D model of a person/object featuring the red cross and use it for recreation/reenactment of completely fictional events? (in a game) Where would one draw the line? The whole thing about watering down the significance of the logo is a tad ridiculous as it's found on all sorts of promotional material given out by the red cross, and people are more likeley to confuse it for the actual organization if someone is wearing a pin, mug, jacket, emblem or whatever they got as a token of recognition at a blood drive or for work with the red cross, than when they see it in a purely digital fictional environment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.3.181.153 (talk) 21:00, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Red_Crystal_emblem_variants[edit]

There is a wiki-link in the article that is broken. It is under the section heading "Red Crystal". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Crystal#Red_Crystal_emblem_variants 129.98.228.157 (talk) 14:43, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Red Shield of David[edit]

Under the heading Red Shield of David, there appears to be several paragraphs about the Red Cross/Crescent movement and musueum. This is probably a copy/paste from a version of the main Red Cross/Crescent organization page. It doesn ot belong on the "emblems" page. It should be deleted, or to the extent that hit consists of useful information, should be merged. 129.98.228.157 (talk) 14:57, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Red Crescent - left and right[edit]

This list [2] has some Red Crescent societies shown as having it "left" and others "right". Should we mention this? Alinor (talk) 09:10, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Compound" Emblems and Misuse[edit]

The official emblems are not allowed to be edited or modified when they are used by international organisations such as IFRC or ICRC but also by national societies, presumably in order to maintain the neutrality of the movement as a whole (though there might also be more cynical intellectual property reasons). However, during the WWII, the German Red Cross operated under an emblem that combined the red cross emblem and the emblem of nazi germany. I don't know whether there are any other examples of this sort of misuse - as distinct from the abuses refered to above, but was thinking this should probably be included in the article. I was also wondering whether anyone knew how, officially this applies to the Red Crystal which (i think) is often used in conjunction with another national emblems or unofficial red cross/crescent emblems such as the red star of david Capespartel (talk) 07:41, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Emblems of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:59, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Emblems of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 05:01, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

come on, dude[edit]

"The misuse of the red cross symbol turns out to become a kind of an even double misusage of otherwise occupied symbols when first aid teams and stations in USA are falsely indicated by the Swiss national flag by simply re-applying the original idea of the red cross symbol, namely by reversing the red cross symbol's colors, usually seen at US-American ski resorts for indicating first aid or ski patrols, for example." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.78.200.234 (talk) 04:34, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Emblems of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:23, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Emblems of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:15, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Emblems of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:32, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unicode representation?[edit]

If someone wanted to communicate these emblems textually, would +, ☪ or 🌘, and ◇ do? Arlo James Barnes 22:49, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Should we add the IRCRC nav bar?[edit]

Should we add this nav bar? Template:Red_Cross_Red_Crescent_Movement

Alternately, is there a better one to add? Joe407 (talk) 12:14, 4 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed emblems[edit]

Hello! I was thinking it could be nice to include images of the proposed and rejected emblems. I am curious about the Red Flame, for instance. Thank you! Education-over-easy (talk) 16:22, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dead Link[edit]

The link in the section 5.4 "Use of the emblems in Singapore" seems to be dead.

Knotfish (talk) 10:10, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pre-ICRC red crosses[edit]

There are two Christian religious orders, the Knights Hospitaller (founded 1099) and Camillians (founded 1586), that use a red cross-like symbol. The Camillians use a red Latin cross, while the Hospitallers (and their descendant organizations) use a white Maltese cross on a red field. Both of them are and were primarily involved in medical work, and prominently display these symbols while performing this work, for example in services provided by Malteser International.

These symbols don't seem to have a direct genealogical relationship to the ICRC's red cross, but they may be worthy of discussion if only to demonstrate this. Are there any reliable sources that compare them to one another? Marisauna (talk) 21:54, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Emblems_of_the_International_Red_Cross_and_Red_Crescent_Movement&oldid=1220112671"