Image talk:Multinational force in iraq countries.PNG
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Italy is erroneously coloured purple as having formerly had forces in Iraq. However, even with the new decision from Prodi, the Italian forces remain in Italy and no fixed date has been set for their withdrawal. Rune X2 18:56, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
- Italy was originally coloured orange but it looks like the image was changed a few days ago. I will revert to the original version --Astrokey44 14:48, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Iceland
According to the related article, Iceland had 2 men in Irak withdrawn, so should be painted in the appropriate colour. 145.242.3.30 09:38, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Japan withdrawal
Japan has withdrawn all its men, so should now be dyed into purple. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.115.41.103 (talk • contribs).
[edit] Image does not exist!
Apparently, this image does not seem to exit in the main image page. Have anyone noticed this? No records of this image could be found in the deletion log as well. --Siva1979Talk to me 03:59, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
- this is what happens with all images on commons. when you load an image on commons, you can use the image with the same name on wikipedia but the image isnt actually on wikipedia, despite the fact that the discussion tab for the image which isnt there takes you to a wikipedia talk page - its difficult to describe this! but I hope that makes sense. see commons:Image:Multinational force in iraq countries.PNG - but then click on the "en" tab at the top and youll be taken to the wikipedia page where you can see the image --Astrokey44 04:52, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Italy and Canada
With Italy and canada gone, we should recolor them Czolgolz 15:35, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
I don't think Canada should be included in purple. The only Canadians in Iraq were on exchange with other militaries, it was conspicuously outside of the coalition from the beginning. TastyCakes 16:46, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, I agree. Canada does not have, and has never had, a military presence in Iraq. There is no argument for identifying it as a "former" participant, as it openly stated its intent not to participate and did not modify that policy --Yst 22:21, 15 March 2007 (UTC)