Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Heraldry and vexillology/Archive 2010

Archive 2005

←

Archive 2008

Archive 2009

Archive 2010

This page is an Archive of the discussions from WikiProject Heraldry and vexillology talk page (Discussion page). (January 2010 - December 2010) - Please Do not edit!

Request

There are a number of “missing” titles and relative duties in the nobility pages; I can only list a few:

• Guy (most commonly heard as “Guy of Gisbon”, the Robin HOOD character)
• Ensign (other than as a militry rank)
• Prince (other than son of a king/Queen; as used in Romeo and Juliet, for example- Appears to be roughly equal to a modern-day Mayor or possibly Governor)

It would be helpful to know what their station would have been. 174.25.99.225 (talk) 16:31, 4 January 2010 (UTC)A REDDSON

Guy (as in Gisbourne and Fawkes) is a name, not a title.

Ensign is primarily a kind of flag; the naval rank is a metonymy from this, I believe. Have you yet another sense in mind?

Prince in archaic usage can be any nobleman or head of state, without meaning a specific rank.

—Tamfang (talk) 22:31, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Remove File:Coats of arms of None.svg

As per Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Flag_Template#Flag_of_none, this image is either WP:OR,a depreciated place holder or should only be used to indicate an error condition in a template and as such should be removed Gnevin (talk) 12:42, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

WP 1.0 bot announcement

This message is being sent to each WikiProject that participates in the WP 1.0 assessment system. On Saturday, January 23, 2010, the WP 1.0 bot will be upgraded. Your project does not need to take any action, but the appearance of your project's summary table will change. The upgrade will make many new, optional features available to all WikiProjects. Additional information is available at the WP 1.0 project homepage. — Carl (CBM · talk) 03:24, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Unrecognized heraldic ordinary

I have been trying to create a new category in Commons for a heraldic ordinary, but the issue here is that I do not know English name for it - if there's any, could be that it is not recognized as ordinary in English heraldry at all. I was suggested to ask the name here, and so far we have identified it to be called in Finnish pieli, in Swedish post and in French adextré or senestré depending on position. This ordinary is like chief, but on the side of shield instead of being on top, and it is visible e.g. in these: . Thanks in advance for any help available on this subject. --Care (talk) 09:38, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

In SCA armory I think it's called a side; I haven't encountered it otherwise in any English-speaking source. —Tamfang (talk) 05:40, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your help. I have used this now for new category in Commons. --Care (talk) 22:53, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

An item with this ordinary just came up on a SCA mailing-list; they're calling it a tierce. —Tamfang (talk) 01:06, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Ja, tierce is surely the best word for it. By the way, let's not use the word 'ordinary' here, as it further blurs an already vague category. Chiefs, pales, fesses, bends (sinister), and crosses are all ordinaries, plainly. Saltires are almost always. Bases? Probably not. Trying to expand the list beyond that gets... messy.

What's messy about it, if we confine it to simple geometric entities that take part of their shape from that of the shield? No one wants to shove billets and rustres in there. —Tamfang (talk) 20:05, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Wouldn't they be parted per pale (wavy/unduly/etc) enhanced dexter/sinister? --Kimon^talk 18:41, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

enhanced means toward the chief; perhaps displaced to [side]. —Tamfang (talk) 03:14, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Italian blazon apparently uses addestrato and sinistrato (according to some notes of mine, circa 1986–8, that I just found in a box). —Tamfang (talk) 20:05, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Cercelée & Cross moline

Are not Cercelée and Cross moline the same thing ? Can I propose WP:PM or did I miss something ? And if not, what is the difference ? (fyi we have just one category on Commons and one word in french). Cdlt, VIGNERON * ^discut. 09:14, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

I always assumed it was a matter of how far curled they were - moline, cercelée, recercelée. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 19:53, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Clean-shaven unicorn for Scotland

I am only 98% sure about this, but I think the unicorn in the royal coat of arms of the United Kingdom ought to sport a beard. I have suddenly realised that all relevant images of the afore-linked article (such as this) lack said beard; one might suspect an erroneous depiction of the unicorn as a horse with a horn, but the tail disproves such a theory. Can anyone weigh in? Waltham, The Duke of 02:45, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

99% sure, after seeing a few off-site examples.

By the way, you may want to have a laugh with this. Waltham, The Duke of 06:19, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Commons discussion

Hi,

I start a discussion on Commons about moving all categories about tinctures. Could you give your point of view on Commons talk:WikiProject Heraldry#Coats of arms by tinctures. Cdlt, VIGNERON * ^discut. 13:17, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

This link should work: commons:Commons talk:WikiProject Heraldry#Coats of arms by tinctures. - Jarry1250 ^{[Humorous? Discuss.]} 16:44, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Ukraine

There are two files for the Flag of Ukraine, located at File:Ukraine flag.svg and File:Flag of Ukraine.svg. The latter displays in almost all locations on WP – I'm pretty sure that the latter is the correct flag – but the former is on display at Flag of Ukraine. I wanted to give someone with more insight and knowledge of WP:VEX a heads up. Happy editing. JohnnyPolo24 (talk) 17:41, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

I think they're equally right. I have no specialist knowledge about Ukraine, per se, but generally the only description is "blue" or "dark blue". The former actually closer to what the government uses (in this case), but as I say it's of little difference. - Jarry1250 ^{[Humorous? Discuss.]} 18:48, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

See my discoveries at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Ukraine#State_flag_colors. Frankly, the Pantone colors are known to the government, but I just need to pry it out of them. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 19:04, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I'd fully support going with the official Pantone, provided the government does. Good research there. - Jarry1250 ^{[Humorous? Discuss.]} 19:06, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Plus, we can use http://www.pantone.com/pages/pantone/colorfinder.aspx to get the Pantone shades. Now, I am trying to find out where I can get a copy of that document. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 19:17, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

2935 C and Yellow 012 C are the official colors from the document "ДСТУ 4512:2006 - Державний прапор України. Загальні технічні умови - вперше." This was told to me by a Ukrainian Wikipedia, but I am still going to attempt to get this document. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 23:25, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Addington and Addington-Barker

Two curious new articles: Addington coat of arms, Addington-Barker coat of arms. They give "official" blazons in strikingly sloppy language, which do not entirely match the illustrations — and the A-B image has a royal crown! Their authors, User:Rachel Spencer-ward and User:Royal College of Arms (!), are also new to us. —Tamfang (talk) 21:08, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

I removed the silly citation. I think this should go for a WP:PROD or WP:AfD --Kimon^talk 18:15, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Flag of Hungary

In the article about the Siege of Belgrade it is inserted the following flag:

John Hunyadi

This is the modern flag of Hungary, which appeared after Hungarian Revolution of 1848. Shouldn't we replace it with something else (a medieval coat of arms)? (Umumu (talk) 07:02, 30 March 2010 (UTC))

{{flagicon|Hungary|1867}} User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 07:06, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

This flag is from 1867 and the battle was in 1453... (Umumu (talk) 07:17, 30 March 2010 (UTC))

But it is used with the Kingdom, but perhaps to just go with no flag or the solution I provided. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 17:44, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Another question: how can I make the flag of Wallachia and the flag of Szekelys to have the same dimension? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_%C5%9Eelimb%C4%83r (Umumu (talk) 07:19, 30 March 2010 (UTC))

Both images need to be the same dimensions when uploaded, so until the first flag becomes 1x2, it won't happen. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 17:44, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

There is no obligation to use flag icons in all infoboxes. In cases like this, when they are more confusing than helpful, it's better not to use them at all. See WP:MOSFLAG. I went ahead and removed the flag icons from Siege of Belgrade. — Kpalion^(talk) 16:13, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

That works too. I wish MOSFLAG was around back when I first joined WP so I did not spend the first 2 years just making flag images :) User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 16:16, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

They're still useful, Zscout; only not everywhere. — Kpalion^(talk) 16:22, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Flag of Buenos Aires

Hi, I have a concern on the ratio of Flag of Buenos Aires. According to Buenos Aires City official site its flag ratio should be 9:14, but the depicted file is 3:5 instead. How can we get it changed? Thanks in advance, Mxcatania (talk) 18:30, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

I fixed it. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 17:26, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

FAR

I have nominated John Vanbrugh 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. —Ed (talk • majestic titan) 06:17, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Coats of arms vs Emblems

FYI, Xanderliptak (talk · contribs) has been moving around articles from "Coat of arms" to "Emblem" for many different countries. There seems to be some controversy on this, as many have been reverted. I expect that the ones that haven't been reverted haven't been noticed yet...

70.29.208.247 (talk) 23:38, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Blazon

Could someone give me a hand with this? I'd like to include a blazon for the Coat of Arms of the town of Adelberg in Germany in its article. I have had a go at writing it myself but I'm not sure it's right!:

Blazon: parted per fess or and sable, above a boar, sable, toward sinister, beneath a dog, or, toward dexter

Thanks. ChrisRedstone (talk) 13:22, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Per fess or and sable, in chief a boar counter-courant and in base a dog courant, all counterchanged. —Tamfang (talk) 15:01, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Per fess, 1 or a boar counter-courant sable, 2 a dog courant or. —Tamfang (talk) 15:01, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

I'd blazon it "Per fess Or and sable, a boar courant contourny and a dog courant counterchanged." You don't need or want the 'in chief' and 'in base' because that's the order you blazon them. You don't need 'all' counterchanged because you only have two items. David V Houston (talk) 15:43, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you! ChrisRedstone (talk) 18:34, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Help?

Hello everyone, I am sorry to interromp but I just need to ask an opinion and a favour to someone. My problem is that on the article Coat of arms of Yugoslavia, in the infobox, there is only place for one coat, but the country had two different coats in two different periods (as Kingdom 1918-WWII, and as Socialist Republic from WWII to 1992). Can someone help me to make the coats presentation more apropriate so that we avoid having one of the official national coats displayed well and the other only in the section "versions"... I did some attempts but I failed. An opinion would be also very much appreciated about if that particular infobox is good for using in cases of countries with that had several coats (well, in this case they were 2), and if not, which one is? Thanking in advance any help, I send the best regards to all participants of the project! :) FkpCascais (talk) 22:06, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

It looks to me the entire article is about the Coat of arms of the FSR Yugoslavia. Make a new article about both arms, then make that a disambiguation page. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 22:16, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Well, that already existed, until one editor (fancier of the Socialist Yugoslavia) undid all without any consensus. See the page history [1] and how was before that editors intervention [2]. Since the articles already existed, should I better just restore them? (Many thanx for the help!) FkpCascais (talk) 22:59, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

I restored the pages as they were before the merge. Now each coat has its own article. FkpCascais (talk) 23:43, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

One user is insistingly restoring the articles in the way he wants (ignoring as much as possible the royal period within the Yugoslavia). I reverted him but I suspect that he will revert me... Can someone please intervene to explain to this user why are some versions right or wrong, since he ignores completely all the comparable articles I have found and explained to him. His disruption needs to be stoped by someone from this project, because he just treats the article as battleground and doesn´t listen neither to me, neither to the other 3 editors... Thank you in advance, FkpCascais (talk) 19:53, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

I am watching the article now. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 19:56, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Well, I tryed to correct it as you indicated but another editor keeps reverting to his version, despite oposition from all other intervenients... The user pushing his version, as excuse, acuses me of having some personal issues with him so, could someone from the project then please intervene and put the article right, or at least help to solve this? FkpCascais (talk) 03:59, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Confusing national emblems for arms

It seems to be a common misconception that any national emblem is a coat fo arms, and I have begun correcting some articles that falsely label an emblem as a coat of arms. However, I have found this to be more difficult than I anticipated. One method of opposition tasks me with finding it in the national constitution where it calls the device specifically an "emblem", and until then the article must remain labeled a coat of arms. Or that coat of arms is a common enough mistake that it doesn't matter if it is technically wrong. Or that the article has been listed as a coat of arms for four or more years, so there is no need for change now that it has done fine so far. This is an encyclopedia, whether or not it is a common mistake is pointless, mistakes aren't to be included in encyclopedias period.

The two articles mainly at issue are Coat of arms of Eritrea and Coat of arms of the Comoros. Clearly, the Comoros device is not a coat of arms, and less clearly the Eritrea device is not. The Eritrea image is but one version, and another one may be found on an Eritrean embassy website at [3]. The camel either natural or white, the roundel either white or blue, the wreath and scroll either surrounding the roundel or upon it, is all a matter of artistic interpretation and it is not meant to be a coat of arms but a depiction that happens to be circular.

So, if anyone could assist by throwing in their opinion on Talk:Coat of arms of Eritrea and Talk:Coat of arms of the Comoros, and help accurately rename the articles, I would appreciate the assistance. [tk] XANDERLIPTAK 15:36, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

I'm going to add a response here, mainly because the above would appear to be a gross misrepresentation. Currently, we have an arbitrary pattern of naming these articles "Coat of arms of X", unless the device has some definite name. These moves have been proposed, but no sources have been provided to evidence that the proposed titles are actually the names of these devices, which in effect makes them equally arbitrary. The way forward is to round up as many of these as we can, and determine their proper names, rather than arbitrarily assigning one. 81.111.114.131 (talk) 05:10, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

I don't think you know what a coat of arms is. There is no pattern, as some of these pages are titled as seal, coat of arms, national emblem, great seal, arms, emblem, royal arms and whatever else. How you divine form all of that that there is a pattern, and that pattern requires such devices to be called coats of arms escapes me. Since you do not understand the difference, let me use an analogy. Cats and dogs are similar. They both have fur, ears, tails and are kept as pets. I read all of the cat articles and see the term cat is used to describe them, and therefore I declare there is a pattern of using the term cat for animals have fur, ears, tails and are kept as pets. Now, some may argue that technically dogs and cats are different, but I say look at the cat articles and you will see the pattern is to call such things cats, and the term dog is being arbitrarily applied. So is what you are arguing.. You can not see the difference, yet continue to argue away anyways. It is a common misconception, though, as emblems, coats of arms and seals can be similar, and even overlap; yet are not inherently the same. The generic term is emblem, and that should be the name applied to all such devices unless another more accurate one is found to describe the device. Please, take the time to read up on Coat of arms and heraldry, and perhaps you will learn that there is a bit more to it than simply being some doodle. [tk] XANDERLIPTAK 01:31, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

I completely agree and many should be renamed. Wikipedia is, like you say, an encyclopaedia and should give the proper wording, regardless what the consitutions state. The Mexican emblem is mentioned in the constitution as Escudo, whereas it has no escudo (shield) whatsoever...So it is an emblem and should be labelled as such. In the text is can be stated that it is an emblem, but that the constitution, wrongly, states that it is a shield. Tht is the correct way to address it in my opinion.Knorrepoes (talk) 07:08, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Flying Flags in the United Kingdom: A guide to British flag protocol

Just to point out that the above document, published in March by the Flag Institute, contradicts some information on various Wikipedia pages about UK flags (most importantly about flag proportions). Could we please update and expand them with reference to the booklet? 188.221.240.150 (talk) 17:22, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

vocabulary

I wonder whether anyone has ever made a corpus-based estimate of the size of the practical heraldic vocabulary. Of course the list of rare charges is unlimited, but one ought to be able to say, for example, "N words suffice to blazon four-fifths of the shields in Rietstap." —Tamfang (talk) 01:21, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

New arms for the project

File:Coat of arms of the WikiProject Heraldry by Alexander Liptak.png

I have not been too fond of the arms for the WikiProject. I was doodling a bit, and came up with this. Yes, a noticeable violation of tincture, yet since this is a project intended to ultimately have any and all arms recorded, it is fitting that the arms of this project be noticed and questioned of. The various letters come from Roman, Greek and Cyrillic alphabets, which covers much of the area in which heraldry originated and spread. [tk] XANDERLIPTAK 11:31, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

The french project choose new arms some months ago. Strange coincidence, he looks similar and it depict a W too (but in Hoefler Text font). Cdlt, VIGNERON * ^discut. 14:44, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Coat of arms of Mary of Hungary (request)

I've been editing the article about Mary of Austria (1505-1558) and I thought that having her coat of arms would be useful. There is a coat of arms at the Commons (File:Blason MariedeHongrie.svg), but I'd like to have a coat of arms identical to the one above Mary's tomb (see File:GrabMaria von Ungarn.jpg). According to the Women in heraldry article, this was indeed her coat of arms during her marriage, but there are no sources to confirm that she ever used it. On the other hand, the coat depicted above her tomb is (again, according to the Women in heraldry article) the coat she used as a widow. The image of her tomb is the only source we've got and a very reliable one as well. I'd appreciate if someone could create the coat of arms that resembles the one above her tomb (on a lozenge, with a cordeliere) or at least tell me how I can do it myself. Thanks, Surtsicna (talk) 13:10, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

The SVG image is correct, and shows the same arms from the tomb image. While it would be more common to display the arms of a woman on a lozenge, it is not unheard of nor improper to have them on a shield and would be wasted time and effort for so meaningless a change. Also, the cords are not part of the armorial device but a courtesy to show that Mary was a widow, so the cords should not be included unless specifically pointing out that her husband has died before her. So the SVG image is fine and accurate. The coat of arms could be more complete, though, if it also displayed her crown, however the tomb image is cropped and her crown is not visible. I would have no issue drawing up something new if you could find or were aware of which crown she was entitled to. [tk] XANDERLIPTAK 14:42, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for answering. The problem is that I need the coat of arms for the section about her widowhood and that I need the coat of arms to be sourced (i.e. to avoid original resarch at all costs). I don't have any sources which describe her coat of arms except for the photograph and so I need a coat of arms that resembles the one in the photograph. I can't prove that she ever displayed her coat of arms on a shield. I don't insist on the cords but the arms will be used in the section about her widowhoow and should describe her as a widow. I know little about heraldry so I don't even know which types of heraldic crowns exist; Mary was queen of Hungary and Bohemia, so I guess she was entitled to the Holy Crown of Hungary and the Crown of Saint Wenceslas. Surtsicna (talk) 18:26, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Though she was a queen, she was the queen consort and may not have been allowed the use of those crowns for her personal arms. I will look about and see if I can find another image of her tomb and see what crown is used, and then make a drawing for you. [tk] XANDERLIPTAK 14:28, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Here it is File:Coat of arms of Mary of Austria, Queen of Hungary by Alexander Liptak.png, not sure where you were wanting it in the article. [tk] XANDERLIPTAK 09:04, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

I have placed the arms in Mary of Austria, Queen of Hungary#Regency in Hungary and marriage proposals. Thanks once again. Surtsicna (talk) 10:38, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Help, Arms Being Deleted

Hi all, I'm hoping this is the right place to ask for assistance on this matter. I started producing arms for wikipedia about a year ago and have made a good number since then. Its been a lot of fun, and I think I've generally followed the rules and sourced my work carefully. However, lately I've found people attacking a few examples of the work (proposing it for deletion and whatnot). I think generally their arguments don't acknowledge the practices of heraldry in general and on WP in particular. (For example a few have claimed that my images are not "official". I suspect they mean that, while faithful to the blazon, they are not the original artist's work. Someone else has complained that the work is not original, that it is merely a compilation of svg elements mashed into an approximation. Are we not permitted to use elements of other arms as appropriate) Perhaps I'm in the wrong, but some expert advice on the below issues would be much appreciated. I don't want to step on toes, but this has become somewhat disheartening lately.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:James_Cook#New_full-width_infobox

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ann_Meekitjuk_Hanson_Arms.svg

My gallaries are here: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:A1_Aardvark

Many thanks! A1 Aardvark (talk) 15:01, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Creating a FAQ

Can we create a FAQ to answer many of the questions or concerns that arise from coats of arms. Namely what I come across are (I.) Were coats of arms ever really considered of value or importance? (II.) Even if they were of value in their day, where is the proof the person in question even used this coat of arms? (III.) The shield shape on the provided image does not match the shield shape on the historical document, how can they be the same coat of arms if the shields are different shapes? (IV.) The symbols on the image provided do not match up in style or design on the official document, how can they be the same coat of arms if they are not in the same style? And, of course, the questions surrounding ‘clan crests’ and ‘family crests’ and whatever else they call them.

I do not mind writing up a draft version if it could be added to the main page and as a header to the talk page, as a “please read before posting a new topic, as this may answer your question” type of deal. And, of course, please provide any questions you commonly come across. [tk] XANDERLIPTAK 13:54, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

South Africa state archive searches

Now and then someone adds a link to www.national.archsrch.gov.za (or something similar); and when I follow them they're always invalid. Maybe the result-link is temporary, or maybe the reader needs to be logged in. For those who have used the thing: Does the result show up in a frame? Can you get the address of the content frame and give that? Or is searching the only way to access the material? —Tamfang (talk) 18:49, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Arms of Charles Edward, Duke of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha

Can someone take and "invert" them? That is, reverse the positions of the shield and the inescutcheon. As a British prince, Charles Edward's inescutcheon recalled his family's origins as Saxon dukes. Technically, when he became a reigning Saxon duke, his "origins" were represented as a British royal. Therefore the arms of the Coburg and Gotha ducal family became Saxony with an inescutcheon of the United Kingdom (that having a label of three points, heart-cross-heart). There should also be lozenge forms of those arms and , for the princesses in Saxony. Thanks! Seven Letters 00:30, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

I scaled down the images. Shield shape is irrelevant, and there is no rule that requires a lozenge for women; for example, Queen Elizabeth I used a shield, while Queen Victoria I used a cartouche. [tk] XANDERLIPTAK 05:02, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Is it certain that Charles Edward did as he "technically" ought to? The Hanover-Cumberland line continued to bear the British form. —Tamfang (talk) 07:06, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Tamfang, Yes. It is on the website for the ducal family under "Wappen". The Hanover-Cumberlands are an anomaly. I suppose they saw themselves, in the German way, as George III's male-line heirs. Xanderliptak, thank you for scaling down the images. The two women you mentioned were sovereigns. Traditionally, women bore their arms on lozenge, cartouche, oval, etc, especially as junior members of families. Giving them shields is an anachronism. Can someone produce these? I do not know how to use Inkscape. On another note, the pointed shield really squishes quarters at the bottom. There is a shield with a broader base, even as seen on the ducal family's site. Seven Letters 14:15, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

The image on the site may be the work of Hugo Gerhard Ströhl, which means it is free to use on Wikipedia because his death was over 90 years ago now. I do not work with SVG images, but if you could use hand-drawn coats of arms for these people, I could create such. However, I do not create simply an escutcheon, but would require to know what their full achievement would look like, crowns, mantles and anything else that may apply. I am not a fan of how Wikipedia images only present the escutcheon. [tk] XANDERLIPTAK 14:42, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Xander, slightly off-topic, but I just saw some of your work and I have to saw it is quite beautiful. It really evokes an older feeling of some of the work you would see in antique books of heraldry. May I suggest the full achievement of HRH the Prince of Wales? I can understand now you would not want to do just an escutcheon although I think it is done here on Wikipedia for simplicity's sake. Seven Letters 14:59, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

I am surprised he does not ahve a full emblazon yet. I will add it to my list of to do's. [tk] XANDERLIPTAK 19:23, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

I very much look forward to seeing it when and if you have the time to start and complete it! You ought to have a website for this. Seven Letters 20:14, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Appropriate use of images

I have no expertise in heraldry, but I have been asked by Xanderliptak to raise this question here. Xander has added the image Coat of arms of the Uí Néills, Princes of Tyrone by Alexander Liptak to a number of articles about the O'Neills, and about Irish people in general. The image is self-drawn, and is highly ornate. In response to expressions of concern that it is an original drawing not supported by secondary sources, he says, "they both depict a red hand cut off at the wrist on a white shield, so are the same thing. Yes, the new is more ornate, but that does not change or effect anything, and I will let someone else discuss this with WikiProject Heraldry for verification."[4] While I'm prepared to accept his assertion that File:O'Neill Clan.png is incorrect because it shows a right hand, an alternative image, File:O'Neill.svg, exists that depicts a left hand.
Secondly, Xander has added the same highly ornate image, including a medieval English-style crown, to a number of articles about prehistoric and early medieval Irish kings or dynasties, to whom such things as coats of arms would have been unknown, with the edit summary "Arms adopt by descend and attributed to kings for centuries, arms are a de facto symbol."[5] I and others feel this is inappropriate. Since Xander appears to believe that he has the full backing of the Heraldry Project,[6] I would like to hear the views of other project members. Scolaire (talk) 07:42, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm not bothered if anachronistic attributed arms appear in articles (with a disclaimer about attribution after the fact), but stylewise this is a really weird choice: if anything it makes me think of Albrecht Dürer rather than Legendary Ireland. (Ugly too.) —Tamfang (talk) 08:19, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Not a fan of Baroque arms I take it? Surely you know what they say if it is not Baroque... :-P

The editors are concerned about the shape of the shield, which I repeatedly attempted to explain was meaningless to a coat of arms and the shape could practically be of any kind. However, while arguing the shield shape needed to match a source, they seemed less concerned that the O'Neills used a left hand and the image they were attempting to display used a right hand. I further attempted to explain that the wrong hand was a major violation, yet this was dismissed by editors as irrelevant, because a hand is a hand. So could heraldry editors please explain the importance of the charges, and the unimportance of the shape of an escutcheon? [tk] XANDERLIPTAK 08:32, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Indeed: it was not Baroque until you "fixed" it. — I'm not a fan of Baroque visual arts in general (though I love Baroque music), but I hope I can detach myself enough from that preference to say that this is an ugly example of the style. — It's true that any two renditions of argent a sinister hand gules are legally equivalent, but that doesn't oblige me to blind myself to the image's inappropriateness on other grounds. —Tamfang (talk) 09:23, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

I feel the same about the SVG files done in the heater style shield popular today, which also tend to ignore other elements like the crest, mantling and supporters for sake of what I must assume is ease. I rather like the external embellishments, which is why I may be so apt at finding new places to add a scrolling arm of a shield. Much to your chagrin, though, it would seem. I do not want to promote the notion of the 'family crest', where a person believes that one shield is assigned to one surname. Adding all the embellishments I can tends to make a person think the arms are either wrong (based on what they have seen in their Google search) or out of their league. Either way, it might help prevent some random American O'Neill from tattooing the arms of the extinct O'Neill dynasty of Tyrone on their calf or forearm to show it off as though it were their personal right. [tk] XANDERLIPTAK 09:44, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

You reckon a baroque rendition discourages the "family crest" nuts? If you say so, but that's not a sufficient reason to prefer it in a pre-pre-Baroque context. —Tamfang (talk) 22:00, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Regarding the authenticity of Xanderliptak's images, I have to say that the image of the coat of arms of Mary of Hungary (which he created) is entirely supported by sources, i.e. the image of the coat above her tomb. See #Coat of arms of Mary of Hungary (request). Surtsicna (talk) 09:27, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Coats of arms, full achievements, etc, are defined by words, not design. If different illustrations have the same blazon, they represent the same coat of arms, baroque or not. The style is entirely up to the artist. I am not familiar with the particular arms in question but I have seen some comments about the ornamentation and shield shape... It could have been drawn on an oval or a cartouche for that matter and it would be acceptable unless the shield is specified in the blazon. Seven Letters 16:51, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

The style is up to the party who chooses to display the work. If I hire a painter to do my family crest (ha ha) and I find the result ugly, I don't have to hang it. If there is a consensus that the artist chose a style inappropriate to the subject matter, legalistic arguments about artistic freedom shouldn't trump it. (Seems to me there's less of this kind of argument about illustrations for mathematics articles, where it's equally legitimate.) —Tamfang (talk) 17:03, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

After arguments of being unsourced, the shield shape being more important than the charge, a notice on the revert notice board, the conflict of interest notice board, the original research notice board, the talk pages of two articles and here, it seems this is just another attempt in a long line to try to find a reason to delete the image. My work has been up on the O'Neill dynasty page for a year, and the editors there were supportive of my work in drawing up the arms of the O'Neills and the promise I would come back to it and make them better. [tk] XANDERLIPTAK 17:18, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

A naïve person like me might infer from such a "long line" that people are unhappy with the image for a variety of reasons. —Tamfang (talk) 22:00, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

From what I can gather, the two editors have issue that my name appears in the file's name. They objected on the talk pages and on the various notice boards, but each was rejected or ignored. It was not so much a line of objection, though, but a series of dumps, where they posted on several pages in a relative short time to see what sticks. Likely each request was ignored because each board figured another would handle it. It seems to be a personal honour thing, where they must prove they are correct and must be victorious, which explains why they ignore the information and citations given them. Perhaps the bland and incomplete (incorrect in some instances, even) must triumph after all. [tk] XANDERLIPTAK 06:56, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

The Red Hand of Ulster has been used by other clans and modern groups as well as the O'Neills. It signified their overlordship of Ulster in 1357-1607, when they claimed the title "King of Ulster".86.42.201.230 (talk) 00:02, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Promotions and vacancies in the College of Arms.

Rouge Dragon has just fallen vacant, Rouge Croix has been vacant for six years, Portcullis eleven. Hubert Chesshyre has retired so one of the heralds will be promoted to Clarenceux and presumably Peter O'Donoghue will be promoted to herald. This will mean that there are no pursuivants at all. Why would this be the case? Surely there are people out there who would rather like to become officers of arms, and some of them surely must be qualified for the job. Does anyone have any guesses as to when we can expect a new Clarenceux to be appointed? Looking back the only times there have been interregnums have been when the incumbent died, which presumably couldn't be planned for.--AmericanHeraldist (talk) 14:35, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Personally designed flag

What about this one? I like it. File:Djuanistan variant.png —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ulises Heureaux (talk • contribs) 03:39, 9 July 2010 (UTC) This is a variant of it. Which looks better? Does either one look good to anyone? What makes a flag well designed or not?

File:More stuff.png —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ulises Heureaux (talk • contribs) 03:41, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

What exactly are you asking about? Are these just flags you made or found? Is there a related article or issue at hand? [tk] XANDERLIPTAK 04:54, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Flags banned as Featured Picturres?

There is a discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Featured_picture_candidates#Categories_of_nominations_that_are_defacto_banned that may interest you. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 13:50, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

www.national.archsrch.gov.za

Some links to South African gov search pages have recently been added by Mich Taylor (and in the past by Daniel C Boyer). When I follow them, I get only a top menu (or a notice that the service is too busy). Is that because I'm on the wrong continent, or are the links temporary by nature? —Tamfang (talk) 17:35, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

external illustrations

I seek comment on what I've just done to Pile (heraldry): taken the external citations from the body and collected them in the External Links section, with blazons and identification of the source. —Tamfang (talk) 05:40, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Naturally User:Mich Taylor has now put the external links back in the body, in systematic (and now knowing) violation of WP:EL. He considers WP's heraldic information unreliable unless every single assertion, no matter how basic, is supported by an external link. Gotta wonder why he bothers with WP at all. —Tamfang (talk) 22:38, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

I would convert them to the citation templates and do something like you see done at Flag of Belarus. Personally, citations are useful for those outside of the heraldry community. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 22:49, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Peer review request

Would any member of this wikiproject be willing and able to review Coat of arms of Albany, New York for me? It's a new article. Note that the coat of arms, city flag, and city seal will be changing very soon per this request. The current (if it hasn't been changed yet) version of the SVG is wrong. Thanks in advance for the help! upstateNYer 22:23, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

"Ottoman" flag

If anyone is knowledgeable or has access to good sources on early Ottoman flags, please take a look at this discussion. Thanks in advance, Constantine ✍ 20:10, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Coat of arms of Pichilemu

Not sure, but how should I expand that article. English is not my mother tongue and I don't want to do an idiocy by describing it. Is somebody willing to do that please ? :-) --Diego Grez ^{what's up?} 00:52, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

These arms are not traditionally heraldic, and can not be described easily with blazon. Honestly, your description of the shield would be just as good as anything, if not the better way to describe this particular shield. [tk] XANDERLIPTAK 03:29, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Flag of NATO

Hello everyone!—By what standard, if any, is the Flag of NATO included in Lists, Infoboxes and such? I'm asking because I noticed the flag is missing in several places where it would fit in very well with other flags. See these examples:

1. International_recognition_of_Kosovo#UN_member_states—In the rightmost column, there's flags of the UN (for Security Council members) and of the European Union, but not for NATO members.
2. Bosnian_War—In the infobox at the top right of the article, flags are shown for all belligerents except for NATO.

Discussing this topic, allow me to clarify that I'm not a “fan of NATO”, or a zealot for any entity party to the mentioned conflicts—I'm merely interested in encyclopædic aesthetics and completeness. --Mtu (talk) 16:57, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

The NATO flag is copyrighted and can only be used in the articles NATO and Flag of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, for which there is a fair use rationale. It should not be used in lists, infoboxes, etc. because this would be a copyright violation. If you see it used on such pages, please remove it. — Kpalion^(talk) 20:05, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

What a sorry state of affairs. Thanks for the info, I'll keep it in mind! --Mtu (talk) 18:13, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Deleted/transwikied galleries

As a result of a scant deletion discussion – which, as far as I can see, was never announced here – many galleries of flags were transwikied to Commons and deleted from the English-language Wikipedia. These galleries were navigational aids, and in my opinion their deletion was plain stupid. The deleting admin(s) have, in almost all cases, not even provided soft redirects, and so these deletions have left red links all over the place. See for example template {{Lists of flags}}, transcluded on many pages. For another example, see the red links in List of flags by design, like where it says in section Cross: Main article: Gallery of flags with crosses, making this completely useless for identifying, say, the flag of the Sovereign Military Order of Malta. In the copying to Commons the wikilinks to the articles on Wikipedia were not adjusted, so now they are red links on Commons, or point to something else; see for example Commons:Flags with stars. I don't know what to do with this and have no concrete proposals, but I thought this was the appropriate spot for posting an alert.  --Lambiam 14:05, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Request for CoA improvement

I am currently working on improving the article on Andrew Harclay, 1st Earl of Carlisle. With my limited means and skills, this was the best image I could produce of his coat of arms: commons:File:Harclay arms.jpg. It does the job I guess, but if anybody wants to take a crack at improving it, that would be highly appreciated. Lampman (talk) 14:14, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

His small arms, which show only the shield and coronet of his rank.

File:Coat of arms of Andrew Harclay, Earl of Carlisle by Alexander Liptak.png

[tk] XANDERLIPTAK 17:34, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Bit anachronistic, wot? Also I gather it's not strictly correct to show colored gems on the circlet: it ought to be "chased as jewelled", with mock jewels molded in the metal. —Tamfang (talk) 23:21, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Though not strictly incorrect, either. There are many examples of coloured jewels being shown in paintings, and arguing whether or not a painting is chased as though jeweled or actually jeweled is pointless. As for anachronism, yes, it is. Though heraldic achievements have a long history of being painted and recreated in numerous styles throughout the ages, and not restricted to the period and local style to when the arms originated. If anachronism were an argument against using a coat of arms image, Wikipedia would be almost void of heraldic images given the use of clip art and computer graphics. [tk] XANDERLIPTAK 06:55, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Medal of Honor

I am curious as to why Medal of Honor has been tagged to this project. As a decoration, it properly belongs to WP:ODM which it is also tagged to. I have removed the tag. If there is a good reason for coverage by this project, please feel to restore it, but an explanation would be appreciated. Cheers, AusTerrapin (talk) 14:08, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

I would guess because there is, though it is a small portion, blazon and flags in the article. While ODM may be the major overseer, those of that project may lack the knowledge of blazon and flags. [tk] XANDERLIPTAK 22:10, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Fair enough, I have restored the tag. This begs an interesting question. MoH is the only Order, decoration or medal article I have noticed tagged to WP:HV. As a general rule I don't think that ODM fall under the H&V purview unless there is an overt linkage (such as the MoH Flag). The question is whether articles relating to the chivalric orders should be added to WP:HV due to their connection with heraldic augmentations? An inclusionist approach to this would see all such orders included, regardless of whether there is currently specific text noting this within the article, a minimalist approach would see only those articles which currently refer to their connection with heraldic augmentation. Any thoughts? AusTerrapin (talk) 04:57, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Unless there is a specific flag attached to an award, like the Medal of Honor of the Soviet "Guard" awards, I would say no. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 05:03, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

I would say, like above, if there is a flag then there should be a tag to the WP:HV, or if the emblem is deemed particularly heraldic in nature. Just in case there arises a question that ODM editors may be unfamiliar with. [tk] XANDERLIPTAK 11:06, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Heraldry and vexillology articles have been selected for the Wikipedia 0.8 release

Version 0.8 is a collection of Wikipedia articles selected by the Wikipedia 1.0 team for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone. Articles were selected based on their assessed importance and quality, then article versions (revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the WikiTrust algorithm.

We would like to ask you to review the Heraldry and vexillology articles and revisionIDs we have chosen. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (♦) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8 with the details. You may wish to look at your WikiProject's articles with cleanup tags and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Monday, October 11th.

We have greatly streamlined the process since the Version 0.7 release, so we aim to have the collection ready for distribution by the end of October, 2010. As a result, we are planning to distribute the collection much more widely, while continuing to work with groups such as One Laptop per Child and Wikipedia for Schools to extend the reach of Wikipedia worldwide. Please help us, with your WikiProject's feedback!

For the Wikipedia 1.0 editorial team, SelectionBot 23:07, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Theodore Roosevelt heraldry question

A question has arisen about the coat of arms for Roosevelt which, until a few hours ago, was in our article. I've been discussing it with the editor who uploaded the image, but since this is a subject I know next to nothing about, I'd appreciate some additional comments. The discussion is here. Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:17, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

BTW, since I also posted notices on WP:ORN and WP:AN, it would be best if the discussion was centralized at the article talk page. Beyond My Ken (talk) 06:03, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Coat of arms vs. seals vs. emblems

hi there,

there is some discrepancy between national coats of arms, versus mere emblems or seals. For example the Emblem of Algeria is clearly not a coat of arms in the classic sense. Many non-European countries do not use the heraldic coat of arms, but rather seals or emblems for their state. But some articles have some serious differences with their name, for example it is National emblem of Belarus, but Coat of arms of the Republic of Macedonia? It's National seal of the Comoros but Emblem of Mauritania and National emblem of Cape Verde? Or are they also seals? I also don't understand why is it Coat of arms of South Korea, when it looks more like a seal or emblem? And the Coat of arms of Argentina looks more like a seal or arms, not a classic coat of arms in my opinion. It would be good if you guys could clarify some of these articles. Thanks alot. Gryffindor (talk) 19:05, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

It is very hard to move these articles. When you list something for a move or just move it outright, people come in and want to talk about it. Trying to explain these differences to people who do not already understand them is quite difficult. They ask for a ridiculous amount of proof, and point to websites that likekwise name the emblems wrong. The result is usually to stay with what the article is currently titled, under the guise that whomever wrote it probably knew best, unfortunately. [tk] XANDERLIPTAK 19:17, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Yes but sitting and not doing anything does not solve the problem. I looked at the Korean Wiki of Coat of arms of South Korea for example, where it states it is a national emblem. And it does not seem to follow the heraldic rules to qualify as a coat of arms. So it would be good if you guys could at least try to clarify this. Gryffindor (talk) 19:27, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

I have moved many and I have tried to move others, which is why I know how these things go and if you notice the conversation on Coat fo arms of Eritrea, it was me who tried to move that page. Coming here for help is one thing, coming here to call people lazy and what else is not the best tactic to get help. [tk] XANDERLIPTAK 20:09, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Even if you do not feel something is a technical coat of arms in the classic sense, some goverments will call them coat of arms. We need to find government sources on what they call their symbols in English before thinking about any more moves. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 20:20, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

That doesn't matter much. Governments can be wrong. If a government calls their seal a coat of arms, that does not make it a coat of arms, nor does that mean they do not have a seal. It can be mentioned the government refers to their symbols as this or that, but that does not change the actual definition. [tk] XANDERLIPTAK 22:01, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Correct, but I hope you see my POV and why some of these moves fail. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 00:23, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Snail Rampant?

Hello Project Heraldry editors, This is a question from WikiProject Gastropods.

We have been using this coat of arms from Zell, Zurich, Switzerland as our logo, a nice stylized land snail. I am no expert on heraldry and so I have ignorantly patched this description together from scratch, but would this perhaps be described as something like: Vert (green), a snail Blanc (white), Contorné (facing left), Rampant (rearing up)?

I know snails are not quadrupeds (!), but they do sometimes rear up like this, and this position is equivalent to the snail standing up "on its hind legs". Many thanks for any help you can give with this small and relatively insignificant matter, Best wishes, Invertzoo (talk) 16:41, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

(I moved it to the right so as not to obscure indentation.)

Vert, a snail rampant contourné argent, assuming that the group mind accepts rampant. The relevant word in the canonical German blazon is "creeping". (I don't know German but I have a handy dictionary.) —Tamfang (talk) 19:53, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

An animal without legs can not be rampant. Either Vert a snail creeping to the sinister or Vert a snail creeping contourné would work. [tk] XANDERLIPTAK 23:44, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for all your prompt and generous help, both Tamfang and Xanderliptak! I figured that technically only quadrupeds can really be "rampant". I have no idea whether the biology is relevant here, but when a land snail does this, it has actually stopped crawling/creeping and is rearing up as it were "on its hind legs", not to attack of course, but to take a look in order to see what there is above it that it can perhaps crawl onto. So would it still be called "creeping"? Would it be something like "vigilant" instead? And do we say "Vert a snail Blanc" because it is white on a green field? I apologize for my ignorance. Best, Invertzoo (talk) 14:51, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Can a snail be "statant"? Invertzoo (talk) 14:56, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

With rare exception, white is only a representation of silver in heraldry therefore, as mentioned above, it is argent not blanc. I'll leave the other questions to the more experienced. Cheers, AusTerrapin (talk) 16:38, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

The German page specifically mentions a creeping snail, so translating the blazon from the web page lends to Vert a snail creeping to the sinister argent, though contourné could be used as an apt translation. If anything is wrong, it would be the drawing, not the blazon. And there is no term blanc in English heraldry, we use argent for white. Stantant, rampant and so on specifically call for hind legs and fore arms to be in specific positions, so an animal without legs can not be in any of them. [tk] XANDERLIPTAK 17:20, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Xanderliptak, I appreciate your taking the time to explain all this to me; I learned more in this exchange than I ever knew before about Heraldry! Thanks so much. Any question you might ever have about snail or slugs (or other mollusks) feel free to ask me. Best wishes, Invertzoo (talk) 13:11, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Coat of arms of stateless nations & Flags of stateless nations

FYI, Flags of stateless nations and Coat of arms of stateless nations have been prodded for deletion. 76.66.200.95 (talk) 06:55, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Input requested on an FAC

Coat of arms of Albany, New York is currently at FAC. There is an issue as to whether this COA is party per fess (as claimed by one of the sources) or chief (as suggested by one reviewer). Also, a clear blazon would be useful. Some help from this group would be appreciated if anybody feels qualified enough to comment. upstateNYer 02:51, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

• Piggybacking on this, Canadian heraldry is also at FAC; I would appreciate input from WPHV members in regards to factual accuracy, sourcing issues (particularly additional sources regarding Canada, as I am unable to lay my hands on a copy of Boutell), and general heraldic knowledge. → ROUX ₪ 12:06, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Image request

Does anyone perhaps know how to upload an image of the Royal Standard of Brunei? It can be viewed here. Nightw 14:41, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Flag of Brazil

Hi, I have started a discussion on a recent change to the colours of the Brazilian flag here. Feel free to participate. Regards, Mxcatania (talk) 06:11, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

strange anonymous IP vandal

There's a person who makes edits to national flag articles, changing accounts of past stalled or failed flag change proposals to falsely imply that they will be adopted in 2012. So far he's attacked Flag of Cyprus and Flag of Angola; if he edits other articles in the same manner, please revert on sight... AnonMoos (talk) 09:48, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

The stupid "2012 flag adoption" vandal is back -- keep an eye out... AnonMoos (talk) 02:06, 29 November 2010 (UTC)