![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 2005 | ← | Archive 2007 | Archive 2008 | Archive 2009 |
This page is an Archive of the discussions from
WikiProject Heraldry and vexillology talk page (Discussion page).
![]() |
---|
For some reason, Wikipedia et alii does not seem to have any copy of it. It is unlikely to be contentious, is there a copy anywhere someone knows of? Thanks, - Jarry1250 ( t, c) 16:50, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
Back in June 2008, following extensive discussion and wide consultation, the Version 1.0 Editorial Team decided to add a new C-Class to the existing article assessment scale (see results of the poll). This new class was introduced to bridge what was seen as a huge gap between Start-Class and B-Class. It was decided that the adoption C-Class would not be compulsory, and individual WikiProjects were free to decide not to. The C-Class has had six months to establish itself, and I think it's time top decide whether the adoption of C-Class will be of benefit to this project. There aren't that many pages to re-review; and it's normally quite clear which are B and which are C class. I'm personally in favour because many flag pages fall into the C-class category because there's a limit to the amount that can be said. - Jarry1250 ( t, c) 16:27, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Hello, all. I've just uploaded a vector version of File:Dummy coa.png, File:Dummy coa.svg, since the former was in CAT:SVG. I was going to try to replace the uses of the raster version with the vector version as we're supposed to do when we convert things, but I can't for the life of me tell which templates are using the dummy image ( Special:Whatlinkshere is only showing one template, which doesn't even use the image unless you specifically tell it to). I would guess you guys have a better idea of where this image is being used than I would, so I'm just letting you know it's here, in case you feel like replacing them all. Enjoy. :-) Hersfold ( t/ a/ c) 06:08, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
I'm thinking about setting up a Country Heraldry task force within this WP, which would have jurisdiction over Heraldry by country articles, and in particular ensuring they provide an introduction to that country. Many key countries do not have articles providing an overview (for example, English heraldry until I set it up). A lot of information is already available in the form of more specific articles (national coats of arms, heraldic authorities, on existing pages, government or Royal family arms) and there is no reason I can see why these pages should not be key to providing coverage of a country's heraldry for the casual reader. It is not really vital to have an in-depth knowledge; providing an overview is more of a priority. Articles like Swedish heraldry can give an indication of the high standard that is achievable, but not required. I am keen to get some of the more active members on side, as creating a start-class article that can be transformed into a B only takes a couple of hours. WP:HV is large enough to consider task force set-ups - I will set it up if there are four other users interested in coordinating action and resources in this area via a task force. If there are any comments, here's fine. - Jarry1250 ( t, c) 15:10, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
Just to clarify, these articles: Template:Heraldry by country - Jarry1250 ( t, c) 17:00, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
Hello!
I got a question regarding whether I should prefer using correct terms or terms that most people understand.
I started translating the Denzlingen article from German to English, as it is of low importance and not that frequented (it's my small hometown) to get into the flow of translating and adding things to wikipedia. In the 'Coat of Arms' part, I ran into the question whether I should use the correct heraldic terms ("per pale Or and azure", "dexter", "sinister") or use words that a normal reader without a degree in history will understand ("a shield split in the middle", "gold", "blue", "right", "left").
Are there any guidelines about that?
And a second question: Are there any heraldry "proofreaders"?
Thank you very much for your help!
-- Blutkoete ( talk) 16:12, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
I can serve as an heraldic proofreader; been doing the stuff for decades now (you might want to search for other editors who have blz-3 in their babelboxen). In the case of the article that sparked your question, Blutkoete, I think the full-color illustration obviates the need for a plain-language description. (Argent is always silver in heraldry, Jarry; it's just represented by white in some illustrations.) I would not say "can be blazoned" but rather "is blazoned," if we have the actual blazon. -- Orange Mike | Talk 17:25, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
Personally, I include the blazon as well as a plain-language description 'translating' the blazon. This satisfies pretty much anyone who could be reading the article. See e.g. Coat of arms of Alberta for an example. // roux 18:18, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
Hi! I'd like to draw your attention to the new WikiProject coordinators' working group, an effort to bring both official and unofficial WikiProject coordinators together so that the projects can more easily develop consensus and collaborate. This group has been created after discussion regarding possible changes to the A-Class review system, and that may be one of the first things discussed by interested coordinators.
All designated project coordinators are invited to join this working group. If your project hasn't formally designated any editors as coordinators, but you are someone who regularly deals with coordination tasks in the project, please feel free to join as well. — Delievered by §hepBot ( Disable) on behalf of the WikiProject coordinators' working group at 05:35, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
This is a notice to let you know about Article alerts, a fully-automated subscription-based news delivery system designed to notify WikiProjects and Taskforces when articles are entering Articles for deletion, Requests for comment, Peer review and other workflows ( full list). The reports are updated on a daily basis, and provide brief summaries of what happened, with relevant links to discussion or results when possible. A certain degree of customization is available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on. An example of a customized report can be found here.
If you are already subscribed to Article Alerts, it is now easier to
report bugs and
request new features. We are also in the process of implementing a
"news system", which would let projects know about ongoing discussions on a wikipedia-wide level, and other things of interest. The developers also note that some subscribing WikiProjects and Taskforces use the display=none
parameter, but forget to give a link to their alert page. Your alert page should be located at "Wikipedia:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts". Questions and feedback should be left at
Wikipedia talk:Article alerts.
Message sent by User:Addbot to all active wiki projects per request, Comments on the message and bot are welcome here.
Thanks. — Headbomb { ταλκ κοντριβς – WP Physics} 09:14, 15 March, 2009 (UTC)
Hi all.
Just wanted to drop a note about the recently started WikiProject Heraldry on Commons| and more importantly the attempt to restructure the heraldry category tree at Commons which is currently being discussed at commons:Commons talk:WikiProject Heraldry#Renaming the category tree. if you've ever cursed the current organisation of it (I know I have) and know the right lingo (in english since we are dealing with categories) then this is the discussion to take part in. Even if you haven't cursed the current category tree (which probably means you haven't had a reason to look at it yet) you're very welcome to drop by to take a look at the current suggestions. / Lokal _ Profil 23:37, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
This article has been in a woeful state for some time now. I tried to create a better version of it, but it simply isn't going to work (half the stuff on it is repeated). I've transferred some of the material to Coat of arms of Germany, so I suggest that other people could check that the Origin of... page does not contain anything that would be useful on the Coat of arms of Germany article. Provided that this is the case, we (I.e. I will) can delete the information from the Origin of... article, reword the lead and move it to Origin of the coats of arms of German federal states as a stage one plan. Any comments? - Jarry1250 ( t, c) 10:45, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
In the spirit of WP:BB, I have gone ahead (feel free to raise comments here as required). I have found no double redirects; I thought I'd wait before removing the current links until the page becomes stable (as I hope it will). As the blue links above testify, Origin of the coats of arms of German federal states is now active. The next stage is to think about the layout of the page, but I'm going away for a little over a week and I'd rather not leave anything open - but others can comment here/actively change the page/etc. (I mean, don't believe I would take it as anything other than help) as wished. - Jarry1250 ( t, c) 16:24, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
User:Jarry1250/Coats of arms of German States (past and present)
Greetings, members of this WikiProject! Several SGpedians are collaborating on Flag of Singapore; we want the article to achieve FA status and appear on the Main Page on 9 August, Singapore's National Day. Although the article failed FAC in January 2009, we are not giving up and have sent the article for peer review. I suppose members of this WikiProject also want more flag articles to attain FA status? If you do, please help by giving the article a detailed review! Thanks! -- J.L.W.S. The Special One ( talk) 16:36, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
There is disagreement over the expansion of the German coat of arms template to include states of the German Empire, as listed here. As the person with whom I disagree does not seem to be a member of this WP, could everyone with some time take a look? - Jarry1250 ( t, c) 15:26, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
There is a discussion here as to whether information about the coat of arms of Lower Saxony is better served:
Please comment (all necessary points have been made really on that conversation). Grandiose2 ( me, talk, contribs) 18:24, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
Grandiose and I have successfully deconstructed the page - but it is in no fit state to continue how it is now. The answer here, I think, is to replace the content with this page. It may not be complete, but this index style adds new navigation and valuable information to the reader, and could easily be expanded. Of course, most of it is a duplicate of the pages themselves, but it is more succinct, and provides a suitable overview to the extent that it does warrant an article of its own, complete with historical context at the top. Agreed? - Jarry1250 ( t, c) 19:41, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
This message is being sent to WikiProjects with GAs under their scope. Since August 2007, WikiProject Good Articles has been participating in GA sweeps. The process helps to ensure that articles that have passed a nomination before that date meet the GA criteria. After nearly two years, the running total has just passed the 50% mark. In order to expediate the reviewing, several changes have been made to the process. A new worklist has been created, detailing which articles are left to review. Instead of reviewing by topic, editors can consider picking and choosing whichever articles they are interested in.
We are always looking for new members to assist with reviewing the remaining articles, and since this project has GAs under its scope, it would be beneficial if any of its members could review a few articles (perhaps your project's articles). Your project's members are likely to be more knowledgeable about your topic GAs then an outside reviewer. As a result, reviewing your project's articles would improve the quality of the review in ensuring that the article meets your project's concerns on sourcing, content, and guidelines. However, members can also review any other article in the worklist to ensure it meets the GA criteria.
If any members are interested, please visit the GA sweeps page for further details and instructions in initiating a review. If you'd like to join the process, please add your name to the running total page. In addition, for every member that reviews 100 articles from the worklist or has a significant impact on the process, s/he will get an award when they reach that threshold. With ~1,300 articles left to review, we would appreciate any editors that could contribute in helping to uphold the quality of GAs. If you have any questions about the process, reviewing, or need help with a particular article, please contact me or OhanaUnited and we'll be happy to help. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 ( talk • contrib) 05:34, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
I've moved this discussion untouched to a subpage at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Heraldry and vexillology/Style guide for foreign blazons because of length and so we can have some more flexibility. - Jarry1250 [ humourous – discuss ] 13:23, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
I am editing a template for Scottish clans, Template:Infobox Clan, and in linking the clans mottoes and slogans have noticed and had confirmed an error at Slogan (heraldry). As far as I am aware the motto (not the slogan) is placed above the arms in Scotland. If there are two mottoes these are placed first above then bellow. I do not think it usual practice to place the slogan, which is a battle cry, as part of the elements in the coat of arms. There may be exceptions to this rule, but seems to hold true for most Scottish arms. If a motto and slogan are both on the coat of arms then it may be appropriate to place the slogan above, the motto below, but these rare circumstances do not reflect what I think is the usual Scottish practice of placing the motto above. While the actual article Slogan (heraldry) can no doubt be changed, the problem I am addressing here is the Template:COA elements needs to be adjusted, and this would effect other heraldic articles. Would other editors object if the word slogan on the COA elements was changed to "motto (Scotland)"? Yours ever, Czar Brodie ( talk) 23:07, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
Why is the blue colour of the image of the flag of Scotland not the same blue as the blue on the Union Flag? Which is correct? What blue is it? And what blue does Tenerife enjoy? What is the source of the answer? Kittybrewster ☎ 18:06, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
I noticed recently, for example here, that formatting of an Anglo-Norman blazon was changed on the grounds that charges and/or tinctures are not normally capitalised. The idea of a "house style" of blazon was brought up early in the existence of this wikiproject ( Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Heraldry and vexillology/Archive 1#Blazon Standard...), and met with consensus then (November 2006). This style uses
Admittedly most of the participants in that discussion are no longer active, and the discussion is now buried in the archives, but is there now a consensus to change the style of blazon? I have no idea how widely the above style was implemented or enforced. Dr pda ( talk) 15:57, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
(Undent, reply to WM) I wasn't suggesting italics or capitalisation was OR, I mostly support it. There ahve been precedents in other areas of Wikipedia with quotations, so I don't think it's an issue. But 4) is about changing the wording, and I'm against doing that, as I would be in correcting or otherwise rewriting a source. Here a couple of statements support:
I haven't addressed tinctures for the moment, but I was just getting a sense a disagreement was sensed when there wasn't any. Of course, you're welcome to disagree. Grandiose ( me, talk, contribs) 10:25, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
I agree that formal, official blazons should be italicized. I think that a translation of a foreign blazon (even if the translation is given in Anglo-Norman) should not be italicized, but rather put in quotes, if we can keep to that convention. Alternatively (and maybe better), we could put formal official blazons in bold italic, and translations in italic. I agree that charges should not be capitalized. I agree that tinctures other than Or need not be capitalized but we ought to capitalize Or because it's quite a helpful convention. I agree that if a blazon says "of the colours" we should stick to what it says, but if we are translating ourselves into Anglo-Norman we should probably go the more modern route and list the colours. -- Evertype· ✆ 12:59, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
Italics: Significant extracts and whole blazons should at least be put in italics (irrelevant of any discussion over additional formatting):
Position: Short extracts should be put in-line, longer ones indented on a new line. (Other options include different formatting based on length, or putting all in-line.)
Capitalisation of tinctures: Three possibilities - all tinctures capitalised (1); only Or capitalised to differentiate from the standard word (2); none capitalised (3).
Capitalisation of charges: We might as well take a poll on this one too.
It looks like we are headed toward consensus on this one. Do we all (the whole H&V WikiProject) agree to the following?:
Comments, please:
{{
style-guideline|WP:BLAZON}}
I couldn't remember/find where we have our list of such things.. I've put Canadian heraldry and Royal coat of arms of Canada up for peer review, with an aim towards getting them to FAR in a month or two. I'd appreciate if anyone here could weigh in. → ROUX ₪ 22:10, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
Even if you get WP:TL;DR syndrome, the vote here should be simply enough to appreciate. Feel free to raise any points if you haven't read the entire preceding conversation, which outlines basically every pro and con, with me, or there in a new section. Guidelines have always represented consensus, so this requires a fairly large number of people as a quorum. It may yet be opened up even further. - Jarry1250 [ humourous – discuss ] 15:46, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
Archive 1 seems to be threads from 2006, and Archive 2 from 2009. Can I archive threads down to and including the section "British Solomon Islands" (all with no comments in 2009) into Archive 3? Anything that needs keeping here? Are there any links that need to be changed if this happens? Ohterwise, I'll be bold and do it, but I thought I'd leave it open for a little while. Grandiose ( me, talk, contribs) 15:25, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
I've just expanded Irish heraldry using the set of graphics from Swedish heraldry. The last of the divisions of the field is blazoned "Parted quarterly with a heart" which seems very strange to me. I'd expect a blazon to say Parted quarterly A B C D, charged with an inescutcheon E. -- Evertype· ✆ 11:40, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
Would it be true to say that blazon covers the whole grant of arms, including crest and supporters (and occasionally, motto)? The blazon article only mentions the shield. Oosoom Talk 08:38, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
Before hitting the most controversial issues, and before Wilhelm's talk page overflows, there are a couple of additions I think we should make, not about foreign blazons but English ones. There is one matter that is more controversial.
Although I'd prefer coats of arms in England and Wales (etc.) to have their blazons, we can't say "no simple description". (That relates as a base understanding to #4.) - Jarry1250 [ humourous – discuss ] 14:57, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Sounds fine. -- Evertype· ✆ I'm all for it. Wilhelm_meis ( talk) 15:50, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Why not any other language? Any blazon, regardless of the source blazon, needs a reliable source. A reliable source for a lot of Swedish blazons, for example, can be found here (in Swedish). Again as before, I don't think there is any higher burden of proof for Anglo-Norman blazons than any other. A reliable source is required for all, per WP:V. Wilhelm_meis ( talk) 15:50, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
I'm not quite sure what you mean. We have samples already which are blazoned in Anglo-Norman (as at Irish heraldry. -- Evertype· ✆ 15:00, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Sorry, there I go with my Swedish examples again. Just pretend I used English examples. It really doesn't matter, for these specific examples in this context, that they are not English. Wilhelm_meis ( talk) 15:54, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Someone recently added the shield of the arms of Alexander Cambridge, 1st Earl of Athlone to his biography article. I've moved it into the proper template for such information, but, without the proper knowledge of heraldry, I'm unable to fill out the details of the design. If someone has the time, could they please fill in the fields at Alexander Cambridge, 1st Earl of Athlone#Arms? Cheers. -- Miesianiacal ( talk) 15:42, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
I was going to ask the College of Arms about this, but their systems are rather formal. It stuck me recently, for all my heraldic knowledge, I am yet to answer two things. Firstly, does a grant of arms now enable familial relations to bear arms (properly cadenced), or do they have to apply also? Secondly, if you are the second son, and bear a crescent as a mark of cadency, and then your father dies, and your brother inherits, do your arms change? What if your brother also had a second son? Historically, it was just a case of making up something else, but now I'm not so sure. - Jarry1250 [ humorous – discuss ] 12:43, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
I am requesting anyone here to please take a look at Talk:Seal (impression)#Recent move, where a discussion is needed for an appropriate article name for this article which was recently moved without discussion. Currently, only one other editor seems to have noticed, and has nothing to offer but WP:IDONTLIKEIT. I am open to any reasonable suggestion, I would just like to see some discussion on that page. Thank you. Wilhelm_meis ( talk) 23:09, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
I'm thinking of requesting a merger of Bears in heraldry into Bear, in a #Heraldry section, and Wolves in heraldry into Gray Wolf (the target of the Wolf redirect) in similar fashion. I could see this becoming a pattern of orphaned X in heraldry articles at titles no one will search for, and I think the contents of these articles would be much more visible within the parent articles. I think Eagle (heraldry) and Lion (heraldry) are okay as is, because these two are widely known outside heraldic circles for their role in heraldry, and I would not propose merging any of the heraldic accessories ( Crown (heraldry), Helmet (heraldry), Supporters (heraldry), etc.). These titles serve their purpose well enough. Any thoughts anyone? Wilhelm_meis ( talk) 23:02, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
Greetings! I've done a bit of work lately on Royal Standard of Scotland and have a question. On the discussion page the article is categorised as a "stub-class heraldry and vexillology article". Do the recent alterations made to the article warrant a change to this category? If not, then what else requires to be done? Any help appreciated.
Regards Endrick Shellycoat 17:33, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
Good day to all. The article in question—a short one—describes the flag as "a white ensign with the Union Flag in the canton, defaced with the Coat of Arms of the British Antarctic Territory". I know it is accurate to describe most colonial flags as "a blue ensign defaced with x" (even, perhaps, with the redundancy of mentioning the Union Flag), but in this case I am not sure; can it be said to be a white ensign without the cross? Waltham, The Duke of 21:38, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
Need help on the following arms: ar. a chev. betw, three pewits sa. the whole within a border gyronny of eight or and of the second. as found for
Russell of Charlton Park, bt in the
general armory. I am note sure what is meant by a border gyronny, I have done the arms without border, see
, and am aware of what a gyronny is i.e:
. My thinking is that this may be another way of saying
Compony bordure (i.e. eight compons or and of the second), am I correct? Yours ever,
Czar Brodie (
talk)
14:32, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
Out of interest, how likely is it that he'll be knighted on retirement when he's 70 on 22 June 2010? Brooke-Little missed out on a knighthood despite having been a CVO for thirteen years on his own retirement (so that promotion to KCVO would have seemed timely). Both men will have been officers of arms for more or less forty years on retirement. Walker also missed out on a knighthood. On the other hand, Walter Verco was knighted on retirement from the junior position of Norroy and Ulster. It's not quite relevant, and time will tell anyway, but I'd be curious to know what anyone predicts.-- 128.86.175.170 ( talk) 18:58, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
In case anybody's interested in putting it right, User:evadb irresponsibly created an article on Walter Verco which I've just discovered is virtually word-for-word identical with his obituary in the Telegraph. It astonishes me that anybody would think it appropriate essentially to copy and paste somebody else's original work and pass it off as an encyclopaedia article. It is immoral and illegal. If anybody wants to save Sir Walter's article, please do so before the present article is deleted.-- Oxonian2006 ( talk) 00:20, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi! I've created heraldrydatabase.tk, which, in the least, could help you people to track down reliable sources for arms and/or blazons etc (self-explanatory). Of course, I shan't be adding any links to it, but I suggest you follow through to the original source anyway. It'll get steadily bigger in range in the future. 92.23.39.117 ( talk) 19:12, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
Sorry if this is not the right place, I am not sure where to ask.
I am translating this article and it has a blazon, the text of which (in French) is:
d'azur à deux éperons d'or à l'antigue avec leurs sous-pied l'un sur l'autre, celui de la pointe contourné, les courroies aussi d'or entrelacées au cœur de l'écu, au chef d'argent à une salamandre de gueules accostée de deux fleurs de lys aussi d'or.
In English I have translated it:
"Azur with two golden spurs with their undersoles one against the other and a half turn about, the wheels also in gold, the ?courroies also of gold interlaced in the middle of the shield, at the silver (argent?) head a salamander of gueles(?) flanked by fleurs de lys also in gold."
Obviously heraldry uses its own language often based on French so I am hoping someone else could provide me with a better English description than this. The image is on the page. Thanks SimonTrew ( talk) 19:42, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
A better translation (still not perfect) :
"Azur with two Or spurs with their undersoles one against the other and a half turn about, the one in base contourned, strap also Or interlaced in the middle of the shield, on a chief argent a salamander gules flanked by fleur-de-lis also Or."
(but my english isn't enough good to be sure). Cdlt, VIGNERON * discut. 09:52, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
Azure two spurs fesswise contourny undersole straps one against the other intertwined in pale rowelled and buckled Or on a chief argent a salamander gules between two fleur-de-lis Or. [tk] XANDERLIPTAK 02:23, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
Please join the discussion at Commons:Commons talk:Licensing#Template: PD-US-flag. Thank you, Awg1010 ( talk) 20:23, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
It seems that while lucy is the common English heraldic name for the fish commonly known as pike (a term which redirects to the Latin name, esox), ged is the common Scottish term for the same. We currently have an article for the ged (heraldry), though pike (fish) redirects to esox and there is not even a redirect for lucy (heraldry). Should there be a merger somewhere? Where should we point the links in the Heraldic creatures template? The template includes both terms lucy and ged. There aren't that many fish in heraldry. Should we just merge these articles into one comprehensive article on Fish in heraldry, to include the dolphin, the scallop, and information on the attitudes ascribed to fish? Wilhelm Meis ( Quatsch!) 10:18, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
I think that Garter and Clarenceux, who are about to retire, ought to get knighthoods. Who agrees?-- 128.86.174.243 ( talk) 13:28, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
Help requested at Castile-La Mancha#Flag and Castile-La Mancha#Coat of arms. I've done my best to translate texts from Spanish statutes (originals are provided in footnotes), but I'm no heraldist, and there is a lot of specialized vocabulary here. Someone can undoubtedly improve what I wrote. The flag and coat of arms are visible on the page, so they can readily be used for reference. Ideally, what I wrote should be checked by someone with a good knowledge of heraldry and at least a reading knowledge of Spanish. - Jmabel | Talk 18:13, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
I have nominated Flag of India for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Cirt ( talk) 03:22, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
Hello, I wonder if anyone in this project could help resolve a dispute on Talk:Wales? I am reasonably certain that the image to the right is the coat of arms of Wales, being connected with Princes of Wales both pre- and post- Edwardian conquest. I have gathered what evidence I can find on the internet and presented it here and here, but few are as yet convinced. Have you access to any print sources that can confirm what is already clear from this file?
I am aware of the existence of the new Royal Badge of Wales, which incorporates these arms. However, it is unclear to me whether that's meant to be the device only of the National Assembly. Also, its unionist imagery has made it controversial amongst editors and re-inclusion in the page's infobox would likely lead to it being removed again. I'm sure a case can be made that this image is Wales's equivalent of the three lions of England and the lion rampant of Scotland. Thank you, Ham 21:30, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
I wonder who created this version of the French emblem, quite different from the one shown here and whether it was really used or not.-- Carnby ( talk) 15:21, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
I found this
file on commons. If someone knew what's this, please write to me (I prefer answers in Polish)
KamilkaŚ (
talk)
17:31, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
As a result of a question on Wiktionary, I've checked into the use of the term attitude to describe the posture of beasts and birds. The result: I don't find it used. Fox-Davies, Parker, and Elvin all call this position, and there are a few sources that call it posture, but I've not found any English language source that calls this quality attitude. I suggest we rename the article. -- EncycloPetey ( talk) 18:59, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi. Would anyone here like to flesh out the section on the article Anthony Roll about 16th century English warship flags? -- Una Smith ( talk) 17:36, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 2005 | ← | Archive 2007 | Archive 2008 | Archive 2009 |
This page is an Archive of the discussions from
WikiProject Heraldry and vexillology talk page (Discussion page).
![]() |
---|
For some reason, Wikipedia et alii does not seem to have any copy of it. It is unlikely to be contentious, is there a copy anywhere someone knows of? Thanks, - Jarry1250 ( t, c) 16:50, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
Back in June 2008, following extensive discussion and wide consultation, the Version 1.0 Editorial Team decided to add a new C-Class to the existing article assessment scale (see results of the poll). This new class was introduced to bridge what was seen as a huge gap between Start-Class and B-Class. It was decided that the adoption C-Class would not be compulsory, and individual WikiProjects were free to decide not to. The C-Class has had six months to establish itself, and I think it's time top decide whether the adoption of C-Class will be of benefit to this project. There aren't that many pages to re-review; and it's normally quite clear which are B and which are C class. I'm personally in favour because many flag pages fall into the C-class category because there's a limit to the amount that can be said. - Jarry1250 ( t, c) 16:27, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Hello, all. I've just uploaded a vector version of File:Dummy coa.png, File:Dummy coa.svg, since the former was in CAT:SVG. I was going to try to replace the uses of the raster version with the vector version as we're supposed to do when we convert things, but I can't for the life of me tell which templates are using the dummy image ( Special:Whatlinkshere is only showing one template, which doesn't even use the image unless you specifically tell it to). I would guess you guys have a better idea of where this image is being used than I would, so I'm just letting you know it's here, in case you feel like replacing them all. Enjoy. :-) Hersfold ( t/ a/ c) 06:08, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
I'm thinking about setting up a Country Heraldry task force within this WP, which would have jurisdiction over Heraldry by country articles, and in particular ensuring they provide an introduction to that country. Many key countries do not have articles providing an overview (for example, English heraldry until I set it up). A lot of information is already available in the form of more specific articles (national coats of arms, heraldic authorities, on existing pages, government or Royal family arms) and there is no reason I can see why these pages should not be key to providing coverage of a country's heraldry for the casual reader. It is not really vital to have an in-depth knowledge; providing an overview is more of a priority. Articles like Swedish heraldry can give an indication of the high standard that is achievable, but not required. I am keen to get some of the more active members on side, as creating a start-class article that can be transformed into a B only takes a couple of hours. WP:HV is large enough to consider task force set-ups - I will set it up if there are four other users interested in coordinating action and resources in this area via a task force. If there are any comments, here's fine. - Jarry1250 ( t, c) 15:10, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
Just to clarify, these articles: Template:Heraldry by country - Jarry1250 ( t, c) 17:00, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
Hello!
I got a question regarding whether I should prefer using correct terms or terms that most people understand.
I started translating the Denzlingen article from German to English, as it is of low importance and not that frequented (it's my small hometown) to get into the flow of translating and adding things to wikipedia. In the 'Coat of Arms' part, I ran into the question whether I should use the correct heraldic terms ("per pale Or and azure", "dexter", "sinister") or use words that a normal reader without a degree in history will understand ("a shield split in the middle", "gold", "blue", "right", "left").
Are there any guidelines about that?
And a second question: Are there any heraldry "proofreaders"?
Thank you very much for your help!
-- Blutkoete ( talk) 16:12, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
I can serve as an heraldic proofreader; been doing the stuff for decades now (you might want to search for other editors who have blz-3 in their babelboxen). In the case of the article that sparked your question, Blutkoete, I think the full-color illustration obviates the need for a plain-language description. (Argent is always silver in heraldry, Jarry; it's just represented by white in some illustrations.) I would not say "can be blazoned" but rather "is blazoned," if we have the actual blazon. -- Orange Mike | Talk 17:25, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
Personally, I include the blazon as well as a plain-language description 'translating' the blazon. This satisfies pretty much anyone who could be reading the article. See e.g. Coat of arms of Alberta for an example. // roux 18:18, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
Hi! I'd like to draw your attention to the new WikiProject coordinators' working group, an effort to bring both official and unofficial WikiProject coordinators together so that the projects can more easily develop consensus and collaborate. This group has been created after discussion regarding possible changes to the A-Class review system, and that may be one of the first things discussed by interested coordinators.
All designated project coordinators are invited to join this working group. If your project hasn't formally designated any editors as coordinators, but you are someone who regularly deals with coordination tasks in the project, please feel free to join as well. — Delievered by §hepBot ( Disable) on behalf of the WikiProject coordinators' working group at 05:35, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
This is a notice to let you know about Article alerts, a fully-automated subscription-based news delivery system designed to notify WikiProjects and Taskforces when articles are entering Articles for deletion, Requests for comment, Peer review and other workflows ( full list). The reports are updated on a daily basis, and provide brief summaries of what happened, with relevant links to discussion or results when possible. A certain degree of customization is available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on. An example of a customized report can be found here.
If you are already subscribed to Article Alerts, it is now easier to
report bugs and
request new features. We are also in the process of implementing a
"news system", which would let projects know about ongoing discussions on a wikipedia-wide level, and other things of interest. The developers also note that some subscribing WikiProjects and Taskforces use the display=none
parameter, but forget to give a link to their alert page. Your alert page should be located at "Wikipedia:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts". Questions and feedback should be left at
Wikipedia talk:Article alerts.
Message sent by User:Addbot to all active wiki projects per request, Comments on the message and bot are welcome here.
Thanks. — Headbomb { ταλκ κοντριβς – WP Physics} 09:14, 15 March, 2009 (UTC)
Hi all.
Just wanted to drop a note about the recently started WikiProject Heraldry on Commons| and more importantly the attempt to restructure the heraldry category tree at Commons which is currently being discussed at commons:Commons talk:WikiProject Heraldry#Renaming the category tree. if you've ever cursed the current organisation of it (I know I have) and know the right lingo (in english since we are dealing with categories) then this is the discussion to take part in. Even if you haven't cursed the current category tree (which probably means you haven't had a reason to look at it yet) you're very welcome to drop by to take a look at the current suggestions. / Lokal _ Profil 23:37, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
This article has been in a woeful state for some time now. I tried to create a better version of it, but it simply isn't going to work (half the stuff on it is repeated). I've transferred some of the material to Coat of arms of Germany, so I suggest that other people could check that the Origin of... page does not contain anything that would be useful on the Coat of arms of Germany article. Provided that this is the case, we (I.e. I will) can delete the information from the Origin of... article, reword the lead and move it to Origin of the coats of arms of German federal states as a stage one plan. Any comments? - Jarry1250 ( t, c) 10:45, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
In the spirit of WP:BB, I have gone ahead (feel free to raise comments here as required). I have found no double redirects; I thought I'd wait before removing the current links until the page becomes stable (as I hope it will). As the blue links above testify, Origin of the coats of arms of German federal states is now active. The next stage is to think about the layout of the page, but I'm going away for a little over a week and I'd rather not leave anything open - but others can comment here/actively change the page/etc. (I mean, don't believe I would take it as anything other than help) as wished. - Jarry1250 ( t, c) 16:24, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
User:Jarry1250/Coats of arms of German States (past and present)
Greetings, members of this WikiProject! Several SGpedians are collaborating on Flag of Singapore; we want the article to achieve FA status and appear on the Main Page on 9 August, Singapore's National Day. Although the article failed FAC in January 2009, we are not giving up and have sent the article for peer review. I suppose members of this WikiProject also want more flag articles to attain FA status? If you do, please help by giving the article a detailed review! Thanks! -- J.L.W.S. The Special One ( talk) 16:36, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
There is disagreement over the expansion of the German coat of arms template to include states of the German Empire, as listed here. As the person with whom I disagree does not seem to be a member of this WP, could everyone with some time take a look? - Jarry1250 ( t, c) 15:26, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
There is a discussion here as to whether information about the coat of arms of Lower Saxony is better served:
Please comment (all necessary points have been made really on that conversation). Grandiose2 ( me, talk, contribs) 18:24, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
Grandiose and I have successfully deconstructed the page - but it is in no fit state to continue how it is now. The answer here, I think, is to replace the content with this page. It may not be complete, but this index style adds new navigation and valuable information to the reader, and could easily be expanded. Of course, most of it is a duplicate of the pages themselves, but it is more succinct, and provides a suitable overview to the extent that it does warrant an article of its own, complete with historical context at the top. Agreed? - Jarry1250 ( t, c) 19:41, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
This message is being sent to WikiProjects with GAs under their scope. Since August 2007, WikiProject Good Articles has been participating in GA sweeps. The process helps to ensure that articles that have passed a nomination before that date meet the GA criteria. After nearly two years, the running total has just passed the 50% mark. In order to expediate the reviewing, several changes have been made to the process. A new worklist has been created, detailing which articles are left to review. Instead of reviewing by topic, editors can consider picking and choosing whichever articles they are interested in.
We are always looking for new members to assist with reviewing the remaining articles, and since this project has GAs under its scope, it would be beneficial if any of its members could review a few articles (perhaps your project's articles). Your project's members are likely to be more knowledgeable about your topic GAs then an outside reviewer. As a result, reviewing your project's articles would improve the quality of the review in ensuring that the article meets your project's concerns on sourcing, content, and guidelines. However, members can also review any other article in the worklist to ensure it meets the GA criteria.
If any members are interested, please visit the GA sweeps page for further details and instructions in initiating a review. If you'd like to join the process, please add your name to the running total page. In addition, for every member that reviews 100 articles from the worklist or has a significant impact on the process, s/he will get an award when they reach that threshold. With ~1,300 articles left to review, we would appreciate any editors that could contribute in helping to uphold the quality of GAs. If you have any questions about the process, reviewing, or need help with a particular article, please contact me or OhanaUnited and we'll be happy to help. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 ( talk • contrib) 05:34, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
I've moved this discussion untouched to a subpage at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Heraldry and vexillology/Style guide for foreign blazons because of length and so we can have some more flexibility. - Jarry1250 [ humourous – discuss ] 13:23, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
I am editing a template for Scottish clans, Template:Infobox Clan, and in linking the clans mottoes and slogans have noticed and had confirmed an error at Slogan (heraldry). As far as I am aware the motto (not the slogan) is placed above the arms in Scotland. If there are two mottoes these are placed first above then bellow. I do not think it usual practice to place the slogan, which is a battle cry, as part of the elements in the coat of arms. There may be exceptions to this rule, but seems to hold true for most Scottish arms. If a motto and slogan are both on the coat of arms then it may be appropriate to place the slogan above, the motto below, but these rare circumstances do not reflect what I think is the usual Scottish practice of placing the motto above. While the actual article Slogan (heraldry) can no doubt be changed, the problem I am addressing here is the Template:COA elements needs to be adjusted, and this would effect other heraldic articles. Would other editors object if the word slogan on the COA elements was changed to "motto (Scotland)"? Yours ever, Czar Brodie ( talk) 23:07, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
Why is the blue colour of the image of the flag of Scotland not the same blue as the blue on the Union Flag? Which is correct? What blue is it? And what blue does Tenerife enjoy? What is the source of the answer? Kittybrewster ☎ 18:06, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
I noticed recently, for example here, that formatting of an Anglo-Norman blazon was changed on the grounds that charges and/or tinctures are not normally capitalised. The idea of a "house style" of blazon was brought up early in the existence of this wikiproject ( Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Heraldry and vexillology/Archive 1#Blazon Standard...), and met with consensus then (November 2006). This style uses
Admittedly most of the participants in that discussion are no longer active, and the discussion is now buried in the archives, but is there now a consensus to change the style of blazon? I have no idea how widely the above style was implemented or enforced. Dr pda ( talk) 15:57, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
(Undent, reply to WM) I wasn't suggesting italics or capitalisation was OR, I mostly support it. There ahve been precedents in other areas of Wikipedia with quotations, so I don't think it's an issue. But 4) is about changing the wording, and I'm against doing that, as I would be in correcting or otherwise rewriting a source. Here a couple of statements support:
I haven't addressed tinctures for the moment, but I was just getting a sense a disagreement was sensed when there wasn't any. Of course, you're welcome to disagree. Grandiose ( me, talk, contribs) 10:25, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
I agree that formal, official blazons should be italicized. I think that a translation of a foreign blazon (even if the translation is given in Anglo-Norman) should not be italicized, but rather put in quotes, if we can keep to that convention. Alternatively (and maybe better), we could put formal official blazons in bold italic, and translations in italic. I agree that charges should not be capitalized. I agree that tinctures other than Or need not be capitalized but we ought to capitalize Or because it's quite a helpful convention. I agree that if a blazon says "of the colours" we should stick to what it says, but if we are translating ourselves into Anglo-Norman we should probably go the more modern route and list the colours. -- Evertype· ✆ 12:59, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
Italics: Significant extracts and whole blazons should at least be put in italics (irrelevant of any discussion over additional formatting):
Position: Short extracts should be put in-line, longer ones indented on a new line. (Other options include different formatting based on length, or putting all in-line.)
Capitalisation of tinctures: Three possibilities - all tinctures capitalised (1); only Or capitalised to differentiate from the standard word (2); none capitalised (3).
Capitalisation of charges: We might as well take a poll on this one too.
It looks like we are headed toward consensus on this one. Do we all (the whole H&V WikiProject) agree to the following?:
Comments, please:
{{
style-guideline|WP:BLAZON}}
I couldn't remember/find where we have our list of such things.. I've put Canadian heraldry and Royal coat of arms of Canada up for peer review, with an aim towards getting them to FAR in a month or two. I'd appreciate if anyone here could weigh in. → ROUX ₪ 22:10, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
Even if you get WP:TL;DR syndrome, the vote here should be simply enough to appreciate. Feel free to raise any points if you haven't read the entire preceding conversation, which outlines basically every pro and con, with me, or there in a new section. Guidelines have always represented consensus, so this requires a fairly large number of people as a quorum. It may yet be opened up even further. - Jarry1250 [ humourous – discuss ] 15:46, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
Archive 1 seems to be threads from 2006, and Archive 2 from 2009. Can I archive threads down to and including the section "British Solomon Islands" (all with no comments in 2009) into Archive 3? Anything that needs keeping here? Are there any links that need to be changed if this happens? Ohterwise, I'll be bold and do it, but I thought I'd leave it open for a little while. Grandiose ( me, talk, contribs) 15:25, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
I've just expanded Irish heraldry using the set of graphics from Swedish heraldry. The last of the divisions of the field is blazoned "Parted quarterly with a heart" which seems very strange to me. I'd expect a blazon to say Parted quarterly A B C D, charged with an inescutcheon E. -- Evertype· ✆ 11:40, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
Would it be true to say that blazon covers the whole grant of arms, including crest and supporters (and occasionally, motto)? The blazon article only mentions the shield. Oosoom Talk 08:38, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
Before hitting the most controversial issues, and before Wilhelm's talk page overflows, there are a couple of additions I think we should make, not about foreign blazons but English ones. There is one matter that is more controversial.
Although I'd prefer coats of arms in England and Wales (etc.) to have their blazons, we can't say "no simple description". (That relates as a base understanding to #4.) - Jarry1250 [ humourous – discuss ] 14:57, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Sounds fine. -- Evertype· ✆ I'm all for it. Wilhelm_meis ( talk) 15:50, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Why not any other language? Any blazon, regardless of the source blazon, needs a reliable source. A reliable source for a lot of Swedish blazons, for example, can be found here (in Swedish). Again as before, I don't think there is any higher burden of proof for Anglo-Norman blazons than any other. A reliable source is required for all, per WP:V. Wilhelm_meis ( talk) 15:50, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
I'm not quite sure what you mean. We have samples already which are blazoned in Anglo-Norman (as at Irish heraldry. -- Evertype· ✆ 15:00, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Sorry, there I go with my Swedish examples again. Just pretend I used English examples. It really doesn't matter, for these specific examples in this context, that they are not English. Wilhelm_meis ( talk) 15:54, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Someone recently added the shield of the arms of Alexander Cambridge, 1st Earl of Athlone to his biography article. I've moved it into the proper template for such information, but, without the proper knowledge of heraldry, I'm unable to fill out the details of the design. If someone has the time, could they please fill in the fields at Alexander Cambridge, 1st Earl of Athlone#Arms? Cheers. -- Miesianiacal ( talk) 15:42, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
I was going to ask the College of Arms about this, but their systems are rather formal. It stuck me recently, for all my heraldic knowledge, I am yet to answer two things. Firstly, does a grant of arms now enable familial relations to bear arms (properly cadenced), or do they have to apply also? Secondly, if you are the second son, and bear a crescent as a mark of cadency, and then your father dies, and your brother inherits, do your arms change? What if your brother also had a second son? Historically, it was just a case of making up something else, but now I'm not so sure. - Jarry1250 [ humorous – discuss ] 12:43, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
I am requesting anyone here to please take a look at Talk:Seal (impression)#Recent move, where a discussion is needed for an appropriate article name for this article which was recently moved without discussion. Currently, only one other editor seems to have noticed, and has nothing to offer but WP:IDONTLIKEIT. I am open to any reasonable suggestion, I would just like to see some discussion on that page. Thank you. Wilhelm_meis ( talk) 23:09, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
I'm thinking of requesting a merger of Bears in heraldry into Bear, in a #Heraldry section, and Wolves in heraldry into Gray Wolf (the target of the Wolf redirect) in similar fashion. I could see this becoming a pattern of orphaned X in heraldry articles at titles no one will search for, and I think the contents of these articles would be much more visible within the parent articles. I think Eagle (heraldry) and Lion (heraldry) are okay as is, because these two are widely known outside heraldic circles for their role in heraldry, and I would not propose merging any of the heraldic accessories ( Crown (heraldry), Helmet (heraldry), Supporters (heraldry), etc.). These titles serve their purpose well enough. Any thoughts anyone? Wilhelm_meis ( talk) 23:02, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
Greetings! I've done a bit of work lately on Royal Standard of Scotland and have a question. On the discussion page the article is categorised as a "stub-class heraldry and vexillology article". Do the recent alterations made to the article warrant a change to this category? If not, then what else requires to be done? Any help appreciated.
Regards Endrick Shellycoat 17:33, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
Good day to all. The article in question—a short one—describes the flag as "a white ensign with the Union Flag in the canton, defaced with the Coat of Arms of the British Antarctic Territory". I know it is accurate to describe most colonial flags as "a blue ensign defaced with x" (even, perhaps, with the redundancy of mentioning the Union Flag), but in this case I am not sure; can it be said to be a white ensign without the cross? Waltham, The Duke of 21:38, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
Need help on the following arms: ar. a chev. betw, three pewits sa. the whole within a border gyronny of eight or and of the second. as found for
Russell of Charlton Park, bt in the
general armory. I am note sure what is meant by a border gyronny, I have done the arms without border, see
, and am aware of what a gyronny is i.e:
. My thinking is that this may be another way of saying
Compony bordure (i.e. eight compons or and of the second), am I correct? Yours ever,
Czar Brodie (
talk)
14:32, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
Out of interest, how likely is it that he'll be knighted on retirement when he's 70 on 22 June 2010? Brooke-Little missed out on a knighthood despite having been a CVO for thirteen years on his own retirement (so that promotion to KCVO would have seemed timely). Both men will have been officers of arms for more or less forty years on retirement. Walker also missed out on a knighthood. On the other hand, Walter Verco was knighted on retirement from the junior position of Norroy and Ulster. It's not quite relevant, and time will tell anyway, but I'd be curious to know what anyone predicts.-- 128.86.175.170 ( talk) 18:58, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
In case anybody's interested in putting it right, User:evadb irresponsibly created an article on Walter Verco which I've just discovered is virtually word-for-word identical with his obituary in the Telegraph. It astonishes me that anybody would think it appropriate essentially to copy and paste somebody else's original work and pass it off as an encyclopaedia article. It is immoral and illegal. If anybody wants to save Sir Walter's article, please do so before the present article is deleted.-- Oxonian2006 ( talk) 00:20, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi! I've created heraldrydatabase.tk, which, in the least, could help you people to track down reliable sources for arms and/or blazons etc (self-explanatory). Of course, I shan't be adding any links to it, but I suggest you follow through to the original source anyway. It'll get steadily bigger in range in the future. 92.23.39.117 ( talk) 19:12, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
Sorry if this is not the right place, I am not sure where to ask.
I am translating this article and it has a blazon, the text of which (in French) is:
d'azur à deux éperons d'or à l'antigue avec leurs sous-pied l'un sur l'autre, celui de la pointe contourné, les courroies aussi d'or entrelacées au cœur de l'écu, au chef d'argent à une salamandre de gueules accostée de deux fleurs de lys aussi d'or.
In English I have translated it:
"Azur with two golden spurs with their undersoles one against the other and a half turn about, the wheels also in gold, the ?courroies also of gold interlaced in the middle of the shield, at the silver (argent?) head a salamander of gueles(?) flanked by fleurs de lys also in gold."
Obviously heraldry uses its own language often based on French so I am hoping someone else could provide me with a better English description than this. The image is on the page. Thanks SimonTrew ( talk) 19:42, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
A better translation (still not perfect) :
"Azur with two Or spurs with their undersoles one against the other and a half turn about, the one in base contourned, strap also Or interlaced in the middle of the shield, on a chief argent a salamander gules flanked by fleur-de-lis also Or."
(but my english isn't enough good to be sure). Cdlt, VIGNERON * discut. 09:52, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
Azure two spurs fesswise contourny undersole straps one against the other intertwined in pale rowelled and buckled Or on a chief argent a salamander gules between two fleur-de-lis Or. [tk] XANDERLIPTAK 02:23, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
Please join the discussion at Commons:Commons talk:Licensing#Template: PD-US-flag. Thank you, Awg1010 ( talk) 20:23, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
It seems that while lucy is the common English heraldic name for the fish commonly known as pike (a term which redirects to the Latin name, esox), ged is the common Scottish term for the same. We currently have an article for the ged (heraldry), though pike (fish) redirects to esox and there is not even a redirect for lucy (heraldry). Should there be a merger somewhere? Where should we point the links in the Heraldic creatures template? The template includes both terms lucy and ged. There aren't that many fish in heraldry. Should we just merge these articles into one comprehensive article on Fish in heraldry, to include the dolphin, the scallop, and information on the attitudes ascribed to fish? Wilhelm Meis ( Quatsch!) 10:18, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
I think that Garter and Clarenceux, who are about to retire, ought to get knighthoods. Who agrees?-- 128.86.174.243 ( talk) 13:28, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
Help requested at Castile-La Mancha#Flag and Castile-La Mancha#Coat of arms. I've done my best to translate texts from Spanish statutes (originals are provided in footnotes), but I'm no heraldist, and there is a lot of specialized vocabulary here. Someone can undoubtedly improve what I wrote. The flag and coat of arms are visible on the page, so they can readily be used for reference. Ideally, what I wrote should be checked by someone with a good knowledge of heraldry and at least a reading knowledge of Spanish. - Jmabel | Talk 18:13, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
I have nominated Flag of India for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Cirt ( talk) 03:22, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
Hello, I wonder if anyone in this project could help resolve a dispute on Talk:Wales? I am reasonably certain that the image to the right is the coat of arms of Wales, being connected with Princes of Wales both pre- and post- Edwardian conquest. I have gathered what evidence I can find on the internet and presented it here and here, but few are as yet convinced. Have you access to any print sources that can confirm what is already clear from this file?
I am aware of the existence of the new Royal Badge of Wales, which incorporates these arms. However, it is unclear to me whether that's meant to be the device only of the National Assembly. Also, its unionist imagery has made it controversial amongst editors and re-inclusion in the page's infobox would likely lead to it being removed again. I'm sure a case can be made that this image is Wales's equivalent of the three lions of England and the lion rampant of Scotland. Thank you, Ham 21:30, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
I wonder who created this version of the French emblem, quite different from the one shown here and whether it was really used or not.-- Carnby ( talk) 15:21, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
I found this
file on commons. If someone knew what's this, please write to me (I prefer answers in Polish)
KamilkaŚ (
talk)
17:31, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
As a result of a question on Wiktionary, I've checked into the use of the term attitude to describe the posture of beasts and birds. The result: I don't find it used. Fox-Davies, Parker, and Elvin all call this position, and there are a few sources that call it posture, but I've not found any English language source that calls this quality attitude. I suggest we rename the article. -- EncycloPetey ( talk) 18:59, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi. Would anyone here like to flesh out the section on the article Anthony Roll about 16th century English warship flags? -- Una Smith ( talk) 17:36, 25 December 2009 (UTC)