Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 01:58, 2 July 2016

Heraldry and vexillology Template‑class

Template:Coat of arms is within the scope of the Heraldry and vexillology WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of heraldry and vexillology. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.Heraldry and vexillologyWikipedia:WikiProject Heraldry and vexillologyTemplate:WikiProject Heraldry and vexillologyheraldry and vexillology Template This template does not require a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.

Edit request on 26 June 2012

Copied from Template talk:Country data Malta, where it was erroneously requested: --Paul_012 (talk) 16:38, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

please note that many coat of arms in http://en.wikipedia.org/Member_state_of_the_European_Union, including that of Malta, are mistaken.

for Malta it should be http://en.wikipedia.org/File:Coat_of_arms_of_Malta.svg and not http://en.wikipedia.org/File:Arms_of_Malta.svg which i wonder if this really exists.(ref http://www.doi.gov.mt/EN/state/symbols.asp)

195.158.108.102 (talk) 14:39, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

According to the template documentation,

Only escutcheons (i.e. each respective coat of arms's focal "shield", which in in other variants might be part of a comprehensive achievement) are included. This ensures that the arms remain informative even when rendered at low resolutions, as well as a meaningful degree of uniformity. This practice is in conformity with the rules of heraldry.

--Paul_012 (talk) 16:38, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Argentine Coat of Arms

Argentine Presidential Decree 10302 states that the only valid Coat of Arms is the one with the laurel crown and sun, i.e. the only one which is a "faithful reproduction" of the 1813 Assembly COA. The ambiguous escutcheon-only image is not a "faithful reproduction" of that COA, symbolically disregards the outcome of the Civil War and ignores sovereign regulations; hence it cannot be associated with Argentine State matters as it's an illegal misrepresentation of a Symbol of State and unusable under Argentine Law. Its inclusion in most articles would invariably lead to it being replaced by the correct one, so it will be doing more harm than good.

The addition of the legal COA was a good faith edit done by me, because despite including the crown and sun and thus breaking uniformity, its design is simple enough to be distinguishable even at low resolutions. But since uniformity seems to be favored above legality and correctness, I decided to remove the template. Windroff (talk) 07:42, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Coat of arms without crown

Hi,

I know that because of some heraldical practice you think that it is enough to display the shield when displaying the coat of arms, but by the law and traditions it is mostly totally wrong. For example if you use instead of on a page for heraldy it can be okay. But if you use it on a page of the country or on a page where you list the coat of arms of the countries (like Portal:European Union) it also has a political meaning and it is wrong. There has been long discussions in every country about national symbols and the wikipedia should follow the decisions. We don't have right to "fake" a country's coat of arms with removing the crown from it. So please change the template to use the official form of the coats of arms or forbid the use on pages like Portal:European Union and only enable it for heraldical topics. Regards, Tamaas 89.133.131.15 (talk) 16:51, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

True, I corrected it. There is a single version of the Hungarian coat of arms. Not multiple ones (small, middle, fancy) with different amount of decoration. There is only the version with the crown. Qorilla (talk) 12:59, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

The subject of this template is heraldry, and in conventional heraldry it makes no sense to consider a coat of arms invalid just because only the escutcheon is displayed. This notion is perhaps partly influenced by the supposed inviolability of copyrighted logos. I'm reverting back to escutcheon-only for Hungary. I understand that a crownless coat of arms could be considered a political statement in Hungary, but the premise of this template is to only include the escutcheon. The alternative is strictly speaking to use the variant that is most used for each country etc. Please use ] for Hungary, instead of this template, in articles where it could be considered particularly important to include the crown due to political sensitivities, instead of undermining the legitimate premise of this template. Thanks. - SSJ  22:45, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Coat of Arms of Croatia

Similar to Argentine and Hungarian situation, Croatian coat of arms is also meaningless without a crown (it's an integral part of it).

So please use instead of  Croatia (until someone hopefully fixes the template). Merkhet (talk) 09:17, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Period or year parameter

Hi all. This template is cool but to make it more flexible, I think it should have a "period" or "year" parameter, similar to that of the {{flag}} (e.g.{{flag|Canada|1957|name=Canadian}}). The reason is simple: the coat of arms, like the flag, also changed over time for most of the polities. For example, see Coats of arms of the Holy Roman Empire. --Codrin.B (talk) 09:29, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

missing ones

These are not coats of arms. -Ssolbergj (talk) 19:51, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Improper categorization

Does this template belong on Category:Single-image_insertion_templates? While it does insert only one image, it's a variable image. Nearly all of the items in that category contain a specific image, e.g., a {{Hash-tag}}. Thisisnotatest (talk) 22:49, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 March 2016

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Please add the following line to the Cities section: | Vantaa=Vantaa.vaakuna.svg MMN (talk) 07:50, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Done EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 18:57, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 April 2016

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

The template's coat of arms of Iceland is incorrect. See Coat of arms of Iceland. Please change: "Iceland=Insigne Islandicum.svg" to "Iceland=Coat_of_arms_of_Iceland.svg". 185.40.122.35 (talk) 13:58, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Not done: The template is supposed to use the simplest variant of the coat of arms. See this section which explains why the image is used as it is. -- The Voidwalker 19:30, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Erroneous COAs?

Ssolbergj (talk · contribs), can you please explain why you changed a lot of images to ones with pseudo-Latin names created by yourself, of which at least one is clearly in error?  Sandstein  14:00, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

1) It's not pseudo-Latin. 2) I'll answer you in the discussion that you first started on Commons. -Ssolbergj (talk) 21:10, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Why were many COAs changed to other ones that are clearly erroneous? A.h. king • Talk to me! 23:08, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

They are not erroneous. See discussion here as well as Template:Coat_of_arms#Principles_for_consistency_and_visibility. - Ssolbergj (talk) 11:17, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Ssolbergj, please desist from replacing official escutcheons with your own creations without giving a convincing rationale first. Thank you for your cooperation. Gryffindor (talk) 08:33, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

I did refer to this discussion. Please contribute there, it's the same subject. - Ssolbergj (talk) 10:53, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

What is this discussion you are referring to? All it shows is that you are freely inventing coats of arms on a certain template, which has nothing to do with the subject here at hand. It does not address the issue why your inventions should supersede the official versions of the national smaller coats of arms/escutcheons. You cannot replace the official coat of arms with your creations without giving convincing arguments to the wider audience first. Only after it has been generally approved may you start replacing them, which is not the case however. You need to therefore participate in a constructive dialog first before going ahead and doing a complete replacement all over the project, not the other way around. Gryffindor (talk) 11:34, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

Your assertion that something invalid or illegal has been introduced is untrue. This discussion. Please join it, I am pleased to see that you finally engage instead of trying to force through an edit. In line with wikipedia's policy, this is the time for discussion, not edit-warring through a bold, disputed change. - Ssolbergj (talk) 11:48, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

You should have waited till a consensus has been reached in the discussion without editing the whole template here. Every country has smaller/lesser version of their COA, and Wikimedia has files for the escutcheons of COAs only (such as File:Arms of Spain.svg). A.h. king • Talk to me! 10:11, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

RFC

Please consider joining the feedback request service. An editor has requested comments from other editors for this discussion. This page has been added to the following list: Misplaced Pages technical issues and templates When discussion has ended, remove this tag and it will be removed from the list. If this page is on additional lists, they will be noted below.

This template collects coats of arms for easy incorporation into articles. There has been a minor edit war about whether the template should use the images with Latin filenames created by Ssolbergj (talk · contribs) as collected at Commons:Category:Insigne Latinae, or the ones used previously. What do editors think?  Sandstein  11:18, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

• Use the previous images. I do not trust the competence of Ssolbergj to create accurate and useful coats of arms. That is because the one image by them that caused me to look at this issue was, at least in its initial version, grossly inaccurate (see the Commons discussion), and also because their resorting to edit-warring to push the use of their own images reflects poorly on the user and by extension casts doubts on the merits of their work.  Sandstein  11:18, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
• Agree with User:Sandstein. Most of the creations of User:Ssolbergj as mentioned above for example in this category are WP:ORIGINAL and not backed up. Gryffindor (talk) 12:33, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Disagree , Comment: "I do not trust the competence of Ssolbergj" What kind of nonsense argument is that? Sandstein, you should elaborate and be specific about what you believe to be invalid/false. You clearly have abandoned the Commons delete discussion that you created, in which you initially claimed that the coat of arms is invalid, clearly ignoring the information given to clarify that it in fact is a valid version: see this template, which explains basic facts on the validity of various depictions of coats of arms, as well as the premise of this template. Instead of concluding on this subject and start various new discussions elsewhere, you ought to continue the discussion. I recommend everyone to read the following before voicing an opinion on what's supposedly 'invalid':

As such, heraldry isn't a kind of logo that only has one valid image; an escutcheon that complies with its blazon is considered to be correct in terms of heraldry. Also, no one should force an edit through prematurely without a consensus. - Ssolbergj (talk) 14:51, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

• Agree with User:Sandstein. Every country has smaller/lesser version of their COA, and Wikimedia has files for the escutcheons of COAs only (such as File:Arms of Spain.svg).

OriginalResearch Template breaks articles

The OriginalResearch template which user Gryffindor added to this template is disrupting various articles, such as Member state of the European Union. I have placed the template in noinclude tags to fix this. -- Dynam1te3 (talk) 13:01, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

• Template-Class heraldry and vexillology pages
• WikiProject Heraldry and vexillology articles
• Misplaced Pages requests for comment